GroupStudy.com GroupStudy.com - A virtual community of network engineers
 Home  BookStore  StudyNotes  Links  Archives  StudyRooms  HelpWanted  Discounts  Login
Re: bgp peering+RR posted 10/13/2007
[Chronological Index] [Thread Index] [Top] [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]


          R1
         /   \
       /      \
      r3-----r4
     /  \      / \
   /     \    /   \
r2      r5       r2

I still disagree, R4 couldn't be possibly learning the route from R2.

The statement of "if R2 is learning it, it will pass to the entire domain
including R1" is flawed because R2 is not a ROUTE-REFLECTOR. It's merely a
CLIENT to both R3 and R4 as per the original post  .... "I am planning to
make r2 and r5 as rr-clients for r3 and r4" ...

so iBGP learnt route on R2 reflected from R3 can't be possibly be reflected
to other neighbors as this breaks the full mesh rule and R2 is not a
route-reflector.

Let's review the assumptions: R3, R4 are Route reflectors. Both of R2 and R5
are each a route-reflector of client of both R3 and R4.

We may need a 3rd opinion on the topic.

I am afraid that one of us is missing something, but I don't know who.

Cheers,
Joseph.

On 10/12/07, shiran guez <shiranp3@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Please notice to the initial note both R3 and R4 are RR Server for R2 and
> R5!
> and for that meter both R3 and R4 learned the same from R1 and they
> reflect to R2 and R5.
> also if R2 is learning it will pass to the entire domain including R1.
>
>
>
> On 10/11/07, Joseph Saad <joseph.samir.saad@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > whether R1 and R4 Loopbacks still reachable by R4 and R1 respectively.
> > Independent of Route reflection, if reachability is maintained via other
> >
> > means (e.g. via R3) the R1 eBGP-learnt routes will be advertised to R4
> > via
> > the direct iBGP peering between R1 and R4. in Summary, the iBGP peering
> > is
> > not broken in the first place.
> >
> > If not, then you need to consider the Route-reflection rules.
> >
> > Jeff Dolye Page 137: RFC 1966 defines three rules that the RR uses to
> > determine who the route is advertised to, depending on how the route was
> > learned:
> > l If the route was learned from a non-client IBGP peer, it is reflected
> > to
> > clients only.
> > l If the route was learned from a client, it is reflected to all
> > nonclients
> > and clients, except for the originating client.
> > l If the route was learned from an EBGP peer, it is reflected to all
> > clients
> > and nonclients.
> >
> > with R3 as the route-reflector, it has learnt the route via a non-client
> > iBGP peer (from R1), hence it will be reflected to clients only (R2 &
> > R5).
> > Which means R4 shouldn't receive it.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Joseph.
> >
> > On 10/10/07, slevin kremera < slevin.kremera@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >           R1
> > >          /   \
> > >        /      \
> > >       r3-----r4
> > >      /  \      / \
> > >    /     \    /   \
> > > r2      r5       r2
> > >
> > >
> > > here all the routers are in as100.  r1-r3-r4 are full meshed and
> > peering
> > > wit
> > > lo0. r2 and r5 are peering with r3 and r4..I am planning to make r2
> > and r5
> > >
> > > as rr-clients for r3 and r4
> > >
> > > .The question here is if the link between r1 and r4 is broken and r1
> > > recieves an ebgp updates from outside..will it fwd it to R4??
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Shiran Guez
> MCSE CCNP NCE1
> http://cciep3.blogspot.com
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/cciep3