nanog mailing list archives
Re: Mutual Redistribution
From: Mark Smith <nanog () fa1c52f96c54f7450e1ffb215f29991e nosense org>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 18:46:49 +1030
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 16:37:48 -0500 Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com> wrote:
Mark Smith wrote:One better solution is to take advantage of route tags or labels. When a route is redistributed you tag it, and then when mutual redistribution occurs in the other direction, you exclude routes that have that tag. You'd need to do this in both redistribution directions, with different tags to prevent loops in either direction. This method doesn't rely on the behaviour of always increase metrics, so it would be more robust. HTH, Mark.I dont believe popular vendors implementations of rip propogate tags. At least the last time I tried loop prevention with that, it didnt work.
Did it happen to be RIPv1 ? Only RIPv2 supports route tags. -- "Sheep are slow and tasty, and therefore must remain constantly alert." - Bruce Schneier, "Beyond Fear"
Current thread:
- Mutual Redistribution Glen Kent (Mar 27)
- Re: Mutual Redistribution Mark Smith (Mar 28)
- Re: Mutual Redistribution Joe Maimon (Mar 28)
- Re: Mutual Redistribution Mark Smith (Mar 29)
- Re: Mutual Redistribution Joe Maimon (Mar 29)
- Re: Mutual Redistribution Mark Smith (Mar 29)
- Re: Mutual Redistribution Joe Maimon (Mar 28)
- Re: Mutual Redistribution Mark Smith (Mar 28)