On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote: > 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. They are dynamic routing protocols, not dynamic gateway-creation protocols. You're asking iBGP to create an interface. iBGP (and other dynamic routing protocols) don't do that. Pete -- Peter J. Templin, Jr., CCNP, CCDP Networking Consultant On-Line Internet Services - URDirect.net A division of Global On-Line Computers 5606 Randolph Blvd [EMAIL PROTECTED] San Antonio, TX 78233 (210)692-9911
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Alex Rubenstein
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Ralph Doncaster
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Alex Rubenstein
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Ralph Doncaster
- RE: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Jason Lixfeld
- RE: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Ralph Doncaster
- RE: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Jason Lixfeld
- RE: iBGP next hop and multi-access media alex
- RE: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Ralph Doncaster
- RE: iBGP next hop and multi-access media alex
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Pete Templin
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media David Schwartz
- RE: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Stephen J. Wilcox
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Christopher L. Morrow
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Pete Templin
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media alex
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Jared Mauch
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Stephen J. Wilcox
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media Petri Helenius
- Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media alex