On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 10:34:02AM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2013-02-04, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
> >> On 02/04/2013 03:59 PM, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > I am facing a strange behavior,
> >> >
> >> > I have the following scenario
> >> >
> >> > eBGP1<->iBGP1<->iBGP2<->iB
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2013-02-04, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
> >> On 02/04/2013 03:59 PM, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > I am facing a strange behavior,
> >> >
> >> > I have the following scenario
> >> >
> >> > eBGP1<->iBGP1<->iBGP2<->iBGP3<->eBG
On 2013-02-04, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
>> On 02/04/2013 03:59 PM, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I am facing a strange behavior,
>> >
>> > I have the following scenario
>> >
>> > eBGP1<->iBGP1<->iBGP2<->iBGP3<->eBGP2
>>
>> iBGP must be fully meshed, a session between iBGP1 and iBGP3 is
>>
Eduardo Meyer(dudu.me...@gmail.com) on 2013.02.04 13:51:25 -0200:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Peter Hessler wrote:
>
> > make iBGP2 a route server.
> >
>
> Sounds promising, what are the key configurations in bgpd.conf to do so? So
> I can look further.
>
> Are we talking 'bout reflector/
Am 04.02.2013 16:32, schrieb Eduardo Meyer:
> Really? It's difficult for me in this environment, do I have another option?
add a route collector that peers with all ibgp neighbors...
On 4 Feb 2013, at 10:36, Peter Hessler wrote:
> make iBGP2 a route server.
I think this would be a route reflector since you're dealing with iBGP.
Michael
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Peter Hessler wrote:
> make iBGP2 a route server.
>
Sounds promising, what are the key configurations in bgpd.conf to do so? So
I can look further.
Are we talking 'bout reflector/collector?
>
> On 2013 Feb 04 (Mon) at 13:32:43 -0200 (-0200), Eduardo Meyer wrote
make iBGP2 a route server.
On 2013 Feb 04 (Mon) at 13:32:43 -0200 (-0200), Eduardo Meyer wrote:
:Really? It's difficult for me in this environment, do I have another option?
:
:
:On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Florian Obser wrote:
:
:>
:>
:> On 02/04/2013 03:59 PM, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
:> > Hell
Really? It's difficult for me in this environment, do I have another option?
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Florian Obser wrote:
>
>
> On 02/04/2013 03:59 PM, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am facing a strange behavior,
> >
> > I have the following scenario
> >
> > eBGP1<->iBGP1<->i
On 02/04/2013 03:59 PM, Eduardo Meyer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am facing a strange behavior,
>
> I have the following scenario
>
> eBGP1<->iBGP1<->iBGP2<->iBGP3<->eBGP2
iBGP must be fully meshed, a session between iBGP1 and iBGP3 is
missing.
Hello,
I am facing a strange behavior,
I have the following scenario
eBGP1<->iBGP1<->iBGP2<->iBGP3<->eBGP2
The very first eBGP (eBGP1) is my customer, the later (eBGP2) is my carrier
(WAN).
eBGP1 announces its network successfully to iBGP1, which announces
everything successfuly to iBGP2, but
11 matches
Mail list logo