Le lundi 17 janvier 2011 à 12:00 -0800, Michel de Nostredame a écrit : > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:20 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patr...@ianai.net> > wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2011, at 12:32 AM, Michel de Nostredame wrote: > > I do not think that paragraph means what you think it means. > > I've seen my own AS in full tables from upstreams using Juniper routers > > many times. > > According to the problem I had, the behavior is more like > "when I receive asX from 1st direct link, I will not send to asX on > 2nd direct link by default." > > For example, > I (say as#65001) advertised "10.1.0.0/16 ^65001$" on 1st link to my > ISP, say as#65000. > and advertise "10.2.0.0/16 ^65001$" to the same ISP on 2nd link. > > Then, > I will not receive "10.2.0.0/16 ^65000 65001$" on 1st link, > and will not receive "10.1.0.0/16 ^65000 65001$" on 2nd link. > > I believe my ISP did not intentionally filter out my routes, > but it more like default behavior as described in document. > Setting up default-route on both of my border routers addressed the needs. > > After we established the leased line between two sites, > we no longer need to send cross site traffic via ISP.
I feel, asking to recieve (and use) default route appears "cleaner" than hacking routing protocol ways. Unless, one does as you just did. Right? Cheers, mh > > -- > Michel~ >
