I saw this original question yesterday but got sidetracked before I could
send a response.
I think BGP needs TCP port 179 just to operate properly. You would need at
least static routes(Ip routing)
just to get BGP routers talking to each other. So it maybe semantical, BGP
cannot get of the ground without some other
"routing" already in place. If the IGP or statics fail, so does BGP.
Bottom Line: BGP is fully dependent on TCP/IP, as it has no inherent way of
transporting its own packets.
Once the TCP packet arrives at a BGP router it can strip away the TCP and IP
headers and deal with the hellos, updates,etc.
Thoughts anyone ?
Winston.
-----Original Message-----
From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 3:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: BGP newbie question, interesting
Dan West -- CCNA, CCNP (in progress) asked,
>Is it possible to run IBGP as the ONLY IGP for a
>particular network (AS)??
Possible, but not a good idea in almost any situation.
iBGP really is an unfortunate term. It is a protocol for
coordinating the "outside" activities of eBGP, and is not intended as
an IGP. In other words, while it may be interior, it's not an IGP.
If for no other reasons, iBGP usually depends on an IGP with hellos
for anything coming close to reasonably fast failure detection.
>
>I know all routers would know about outside networks,
>but how about different internal areas knowing about
>what other networks are advertising
>
>BGP seems so capable that it could almost be done
>without OSPF, EIGRP, etc....
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
