Aggree with Doug with one condition: RRs do not share cluster ID. If the two RRs have the same Cluster ID, then one RR does not accept routes advertised by the other RR which it receives from its clients. It however DOES accept routes generated by the other RR itself.
As a best practice, keep the Cluster ID unique to maximise the redundancy. Although clients may receive redundant routing updates, no routing loop occurs, nor there is a loop of routing updates. Huan On 06/02/2013, at 2:02 PM, Doug Hanks <[email protected]> wrote: > vanilla ibgp between the RRs would work > > > On 2/5/13 6:36 PM, "Ali Sumsam" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> I want to configure two RRs in my network. >> What should be the relation between two of them? >> I want them to send updates to each other and to the RR-Clients. >> >> Regards, >> *Ali Sumsam CCIE* >> *Network Engineer - Level 3* >> eintellego Pty Ltd >> [email protected] ; www.eintellego.net >> >> Phone: 1300 753 383 ; Fax: (+612) 8572 9954 >> >> Cell +61 (0)410 603 531 >> >> facebook.com/eintellego >> PO Box 7726, Baulkham Hills, NSW 1755 Australia >> >> The Experts Who The Experts Call >> Juniper - Cisco Brocade - IBM >> _______________________________________________ >> juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > > > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
