Troy Leliard wrote: > > A default route, aka a route of last resort. For BGP, route to > the next hope
The next hope. I like that. :-) > must be explicitly in the routing table. This is > one of the pre-reqs for BGP to advertise its own routes as well > (unless you have synchronisation turned off). > > In my deployments of BPG, we alway suse the loopbak interface > for iBGP peers as this is already distributed using our IGP, > and then use the interface address of the peering routing for > eBGP, with a atatic route to that IP. > > Good old bgp :). Man it's complicated! Argh. :-) > Right now lets spark of some discussion about > the security of BGP peering :) > > Brian Dennis wrote: > > > > Jim, > > The default route as you've seen won't work but this will: > > > > Rack4R2#conf t > > Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z. > > Rack4R2(config)#ip route 0.0.0.0 128.0.0.0 192.168.33.2 > > Rack4R2(config)#ip route 128.0.0.0 128.0.0.0 192.168.33.2 > > Rack4R2(config)#^Z > > Rack4R2#show ip route static > > S 0.0.0.0/1 [1/0] via 192.168.33.2 > > S 128.0.0.0/1 [1/0] via 192.168.33.2 > > Rack4R2# > > > > It's the next best thing to a default route ;-) > > > > Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP Dial/Security) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.labforge.com > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of > > Jim Devane > > Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 9:28 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: eBGP Multi-hop [7:65823] > > > > Thanks for the replies so far... > > Hmm, Well, actually becuase BGP uses TCP 179 is can traverse > > non-BGP > > speakers to a router that does speak BGP ( Just like TFTP'ing > > to another > > router) > > I put the config I was testing below. The config works, BGP > runs > > everyone is > > happy when I have a specific route to the opposite side peer's > > Loopback > > address. > > > > ip route 172.16.10.1 255.255.255.255 192.168.33.2 > > > > but if I remove that and install > > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.33.2 > > > > then BGP breaks. I don't understand why. There is no IGP. Both > > routes > > point > > to exactly the same place. > > > > conf t > > router bgp 65500 > > no synchronization > > bgp log-neighbor-changes > > network 192.168.47.0 > > network 192.168.55.0 > > aggregate-address 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 > > neighbor 172.16.10.1 remote-as 65555 > > neighbor 172.16.10.1 ebgp-multihop5 > > neighbor 172.16.10.1 update-source Loopback0 > > neighbor 172.16.10.1 version 4 > > neighbor 172.16.10.1 soft-reconfiguration inbound > > neighbor 172.16.10.1 password 7 140705191C117B3821 > > neighbor 172.16.10.1 filter-list 3 in > > neighbor 172.16.10.1 filter-list 4 out > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Carroll Kong" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:54 AM > > Subject: Re: eBGP Multi-hop [7:65823] > > > > > > > I guess I am kind of just going to a quick stab. Do you > have > > "no > > > synchronization" under the BGP configuration? > > > > > > > hello all, > > > > > > > > (Re-post...not sure if original msg made it our not) > > > > > > > > playing around again and have a question. eBGP multi-hop > > cannot come > > up > > if > > > > the peer is known through a default route. > > > > Is there a reason why? > > > > I mean, what is the point of a static route that causes a > > recursive > > lookup > > > > or a static route that simply points to the same next hop > > as a > > default > > > route? > > > > For that matter, I can't see it being a matter of > proximity > > either. > > If > > > > convergence time were not an issue, what is really wrong > > with having > > a > > 10 > > > > hop or even 50 hop BGP session? (I know it is unlikely and > > there are > > > > cetainly better ways to handle it (GRE or IPSec tunnel)) > > but for the > > sake > > > of > > > > argument... > > > > > > > > Just curious, not able to find much on WHY it is like > > this... > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > Jim > > > -Carroll Kong > > > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65929&t=65823 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
