At 02:47 AM 8/15/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>In OSPF and ISIS you don't ....or you cannot use import
>policies....inconsistence in LSDB
>But this would make sense when you what OSPF/ISIS routes to be exported into
>BGP, or import/export on bgp peers.
>Juniper isin't for the lay person.......That is implied Wil
>For what is an active route see Julians Email...thats pretty descriptive.
>Cheers
You might even want to look at
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-conterm-00.txt
which is focused at BGP convergence, but cleans up some of the terminology
which is
ambiguous in RFC 1771, the BGP RFC, the new version of which is entering
Draft 13 and may or may not yet be fully stable.
>""Wilson, Bradley"" wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Hey gang -
> >
> > I'm sitting here reading "Installation and System Management." Page
> > 12, under "Routing Policy," says "Specifically, each routing protocol
> > exports only the *active* routes that were learned by that protocol.
> > [emphasis mine]"
> >
> > So my question is: what's an "active" route? One which is actually
> > installed in the forwarding table? That seems like it would make
> > reconvergence take longer, since your downstream neighbors wouldn't know
>of
> > the alternative routes.
Convergence isn't the issue here. The reason not to forward inactive
routes is loop prevention.
There are experimental schemes that do involve backup routes, particularly
in MPLS. They get very complex.
>It also seems like it wouldn't apply in the case
>of
> > OSPF or ISIS.
> >
> > Any comments?
> >
> >
> >
> > Bradley J. Wilson
> > CCNP CCDP MCSE NNCSS CNX MCT CTT
> > EDS/Boston Scientific Account
> > (508) 650-8739
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=16178&t=472
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
