[c-nsp] ebgp vs ibgp admin distance

[Michael Nicks]

If one didn't want standard hot-potato type routing, I could see where 
it would be applicable, but still a route w/ same info received via ibgp 
and ebgp is going to prefer ebgp. Did they give any 
technical/operational reasons as to the benefit of such implementation?

Maybe my mind is in neutral.

Thanks.
-Michael

-- 
Michael Nicks
Network Engineer
KanREN
e: mtnicks at kanren.net
o: +1-785-856-9800 x221
m: +1-913-378-6516



sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:
>> Routes are matched against BGP best path selection. If you have same 
>> metrics/variables of a prefix received via eBGP and iBGP, eBGP will win.
>>
>> Then onto admin distance, 20 for ebgp, 200 for ibgp.
> 
> I have seen several places where Cisco recommends setting admin distance
> the same (200) for both EBGP and IBGP. A Cisco BGP workshop held in
> Stockholm, Sweden in February 2003 (by Alvaro Retana and Daniel Walton)
> recommended the following BGP template:
> 
> 	 router bgp XXXX
> 	  bgp deterministic-med
> 	  no synchronization
> 	  no auto-summary
> 	  distance 200 200 200
> 
> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug at nethelp.no