I just can't seem to let go of things.  I got the same pod, 109,  this
evening and retried the scenario, and sure enough it didn't work.  All
I can say is that the version on R1 of the pod is an earlier 12.4(3a)
release.

Ok, I'm dropping it for real now...

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:23 PM, jmangawang<[email protected]> wrote:
> Aargh!  Ok, so I just set this up on Dynagen, using two 2691s running
> 12.4(23) and, of course, it works.  Then I copy/pasted the configs for
> R1 and BB1 from the actual lab (with modifications for the
> interfaces), and it worked, too.
>
> I also learned something about how ebgp-multihop and ttl-security
> work, and they are inversely related to each other.  ebgp-multihop
> sets outgoing packet's TTL to the value specified, ie. ebgp-multihop
> 2, sets the TTL to 2.  On the flip side, ttl-security receives packets
> whose TTL is 255 minus the set value, ie. ttl-security hops 2 expects
> the TTL on the incoming packet to be 253 (255 - 2).  So, if you have
> eBGP configured and you initially started out both sides with
> ebgp-multihop 2, then later changed one of them to TTL-security, your
> BGP session would never come up.  The solution would be to set
> ebgp-mulithop to 255, or just use ttl-security on both sides.
>
> I better get one of these on the real lab... :)
>
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to