nanog mailing list archives
Re: IGPs in use
From: "Sean M. Doran" <smd () clock org>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 02:54:17 -0700
Alex Bligh wrote: | No argument with the principles here but why do you need to redistribute | connected interfaces into your IGP *and* into iBGP? Overkill, surely? This threw me too, actually. It's just wording. "backbone connected interfaces" means "interior interfaces on which you run your IGP". For example: int POS1/0/0 description connection to another backbone location ip address foo bar isis circuit-type level-2-only isis metric 1 level-2 which I think is what Jared means. The terminology to explain the difference between that and actually putting a prefix into your IGP is a bit dense, so a shortcut probably was a reasonable idea. --:) Sean.
Current thread:
- Re: IGPs in use, (continued)
- Re: IGPs in use Danny McPherson (Oct 13)
- Re: IGPs in use Forrest W. Christian (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Sean M. Doran (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use bmanning (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Jerry Scharf (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Tony Li (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Tony Li (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Sean M. Doran (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Henk Smit (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Tony Li (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Sean M. Doran (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Vince Fuller (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use Tony Li (Oct 14)
- Re: IGPs in use alex (Oct 15)
- Re: IGPs in use Paul Ferguson (Oct 16)
- Re: IGPs in use Danny McPherson (Oct 13)