> > (a) defining your connected routes on all the routers that would be using > > it. > > I've asked because I wanted to know if any routing protocol redistributes > information about diretly connected multi-access networks. > > It seems pretty obvious to me that if you have a an ethernet segment with > multiple routers on it that adding a secondary IP to each one is more > complicated and error-prone than adding it to one and having a dynamic > routing protocol notify the rest of the routers on the segment.
Wrong. It makes you think about "Why am I doing it" > It also seems that the answer I was looking for, at least as far as iBGP > is concerned, is no. However rather than just saying, "no, BGP can't do > this" many people have decided to brag about how smart they are because > they don't ask questions about how BGP works. Wrong again. They tend to RFTM first. Alx
