Re: IS-IS or OSPF as BGP IGP

["Alex P. Rudnev" <alex () Relcom EU net>]

Exactly, it's not REQUEST, you COULD NOT redistribute BGP into another 
protocols withouth some danger to do bad thing. And it's not easy to 
imagine why do you want such redistribution at all.


On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Paul Ferguson wrote:

> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 18:50:28 -0400
> From: Paul Ferguson <ferguson () cisco com>
> To: "Martin, Christian" <CMartin () mercury balink com>
> Cc: "'nanog () merit edu'" <nanog () merit edu>
> Subject: Re: IS-IS or OSPF as BGP IGP
>
> My recommendation is not to redistribute BGP into
> any IGP at all. I personally consider that to be
> a very dangerous thing to do.
>
> - paul
>
> At 06:26 PM 7/17/98 -0400, Martin, Christian wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Does anyone have any information on redistributing BGP traffic into OSPF
> > versus ISIS?  What about just carrying IBGP sessions?  My OSPF database
> > is growing, and I'd rather not carry LSAs with BGP routes as well as
> > private routes, etc.  Too messy.  By introducing ISIS and using it only
> > as a BGP IGP, what can I expect?  Experiences with Cisco gear preffered.
> >
> > -Christian

Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 239-10-10, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)