On 2007/10/30 10:17, Tony Sarendal wrote: > So running a setup where ospfd and bgpd carries the same prefixes should > work ?
I had problems with this, I think bgpd was stomping on the ospf route of my IX's /24, causing the routes from peers to fail nexthop validation on the other routers. I didn't get to the bottom of it so I just started filtering that /24 in bgpd but I don't think it's meant to do that. The routing table doesn't handle multiple routes with differing priorities, so the daemons must watch for updates on the routing socket and react to them, I guess this is somewhat delicate but I don't have a diff so I'll shut up (-:
