Re: [nsp] BGP selection process

From: Marc Williams (mw@uk.yahoo-inc.com)
Date: Wed Dec 13 2000 - 16:01:21 EST

Next message: Mark E. Mallett: "Re: pppoe"
Previous message: Martin Picard: "[nsp] BGP selection process"
In reply to: Martin Picard: "[nsp] BGP selection process"
Next in thread: Cliff Judge: "Re: [nsp] BGP selection process"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

adjust the local-pref on r2 inbound routes from provider 2 to 110.

but why not get both providers to present to r1 and r2?

--
Marc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Picard" <mpicard@sinc.ca>
To: <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 8:38 Pa
Subject: [nsp] BGP selection process
> Hi,
>
>   What would be the simplest and most effective way
>   of influencing the BGP selection process to choose
>   one exit point over the other in a multi-homing situation.
>
>   I have r1 going to upstream provider 1
>   and r2 going to upstream provider 2.
>   I want to use r1 connection as hot-standby.
>   Therefore in r1, I want to prefer routes from
>   iBGP r2 rather than eBGP upstream provider.
>
>   tx.
> martin
>
>

Next message: Mark E. Mallett: "Re: pppoe"
Previous message: Martin Picard: "[nsp] BGP selection process"
In reply to: Martin Picard: "[nsp] BGP selection process"
Next in thread: Cliff Judge: "Re: [nsp] BGP selection process"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:23 EDT