On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 4:53 PM Christopher Hawker wrote:
> You can establish an iBGP session between the two routers that exchange
> either default & own routes, or they can send their own routes with fulls and
> use local pref to preference the directly-connected transit session before
> routes
Hi Bill,
> I'm missing something.
>
> Wouldn't the route server send withdrawals and updates to the rest of
> the participants as soon as its hold timer with the lost router
> expires?
>
I believe the case here is about a situation where peers can talk to RS
just fine (no bgp session goes down)
Is this a bgp-ls solution to an snmp trap problem? Why can oss do this
notification? Are we turning bgp into nms?
On Sat, Dec 21, 2024, 7:41 PM Douglas Fischer
wrote:
> I'm looking for a way to propagate the status of BFD sessions running on
> one router to another via BGP.
>
> Considering the v
"Obviously, at some point, buying a big chassis..."
Actually, as I read more about it and watch more videos about it, it seems like
that isn't necessarily true. The claims they have at the top end surpass what
any chassis platform I've seen is capable of, though I don't know that they
actuall
Sorry, this is not a general help list for basic networking skills. There are
many options for appropriate training available, but this is not an appropriate
channel for this query.
From: NANOG On Behalf Of Jean Franco
Sent: Tuesday, 24 December 2024 12:33 pm
To: North American Network Opera
Tony,
"The NANOG Mailing List is a community-moderated forum, open to all.
Established in 1994 to provide the open exchange of technical information, it
provides the opportunity for lively discussions of specific implementation
challenges that require cooperation among network service providers
Hi Jean,
You can establish an iBGP session between the two routers that exchange either
default & own routes, or they can send their own routes with fulls and use
local pref to preference the directly-connected transit session before routes
learnt from the iBGP session, depending on how you wan
Agreed, especially since I have seen more than a few professional installations where they got it wrong. Regards,David Edelman who is responsible for the concept of this message. Unfortunately, autocorrect is responsible for the contentOn Dec 23, 2024, at 19:45, Christopher Hawker wrote:
To
On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 10:15 AM Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> Actually, as I read more about it and watch more videos about it, it seems
> like that isn't necessarily true. The claims they have at the top end
> surpass what any chassis platform I've seen is capable of, though I don't
> know that they
Hi Chris,
Thank you for taking your time and point me in the right direction!
I'm getting full routes, so it should be easy for me to achieve your
concept.
Best regards,
On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 9:53 PM Christopher Hawker
wrote:
> Hi Jean,
>
> You can establish an iBGP session between the two r
Hi Folks,
I'm trying to achieve total redundancy on a multihomed environment:
ISP 1 <=> Router 1 <= X => Router 2 <=> ISP 2
Where X is my Network.
In the example below, he announces separate blocks to each ISP.
https://www.networkstraining.com/cisco-bgp-configuration-tutorial/
I would like to
11 matches
Mail list logo
