RE: [nsp] iBGP vs eBGP

From: Ahmer Ghazi (ghazi@sys.net.pk)
Date: Wed Feb 06 2002 - 05:05:26 EST


Przemek,
Your understanding is correct. If you have an iBGP and an eBGP learned
prefix, BGP selection criteria will decide which route will go to the
routing table (In most cases this will be decided earlier than the "ebgp
vs ibgp" comparison)

regards,
Ahmrer Ghazi

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Whyte [mailto:cwhyte@microsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 2:21 PM
To: Przemyslaw Karwasiecki; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [nsp] iBGP vs eBGP

eBGP over iBGP. It's step 7 in the link your reference below.

Thanks,

Chris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Przemyslaw Karwasiecki [mailto:karwas@ifxcorp.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 6:00 PM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [nsp] iBGP vs eBGP
>
>
>
> All,
>
> Simple question (maybe a bit tricky):
>
> Can you imagine a situation that a difference between
> administrative distance of iBGP routes will be compared
> with administrative distance of eBGP
>
> This is king of obvious that eBGP learned routes will
> win with IGP routes (unless backdors are used),
> but is it possible that BGP selection criteria
> will yield a result that 2 routes, one learned via eBGP,
> and other learned via iBGP will compete with each other
> for a place in roting table?
>
> My understanding is that BGP Seletion mechanism:
> http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/25.shtml
> takes place first, and once we have a lucky winner,
> it will be inserted to routing table with appropriate
> admin distance.
>
> Please enlighten me if I am lost :-)
>
> Przemek
>
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:13:31 EDT