On Sun, 12 May 2002, Scott Granados wrote: > Don't forget that if both sites use the same as even if the connection > link drops they will not be able to see each other over the upstream > provider as routers won't take the srutes from the same as. If this > isn't a problem don't worry about it. If you wish to preserve > connectivity between cities you should have a back-up link or use > different as's or gre tunnels:). Floating statics would be a less-hassle means to continue connectivity (with only 2 locations not much of a scaling issue). Or, if you want, a default route (learned via BGP if possible) going to your upstream(s). An IBGP session sharing full routing information might not be something you want to keep established over a GRE tunnel. - Paul
- Re: BGP and aggregation Scott Granados
- Re: BGP and aggregation Richard A Steenbergen
- Re: BGP and aggregation Ralph Doncaster
- Re: BGP and aggregation Scott Granados
- Re: BGP and aggregation Scott Granados
- Re: BGP and aggregation Stephen J. Wilcox
- Re: BGP and aggregation Scott Granados
- Re: BGP and aggregation E.B. Dreger
- Re: BGP and aggregation Richard A Steenbergen
- Re: BGP and aggregation Forrest W. Christian
- Re: BGP and aggregation PS
- Re: BGP and aggregation Ralph Doncaster
- Re: BGP and aggregation E.B. Dreger
- Re: BGP and aggregation PS
- Re: BGP and aggregation Austin Schutz
- Re: BGP and aggregation Stephen Griffin
- Re: BGP and aggregation Roger Marquis
- Re: BGP and aggregation Forrest W. Christian
- RE: BGP and aggregation Daniska Tomas
- Re: BGP and aggregation Richard A Steenbergen
