nanog mailing list archives
Re: BGP terminology question
From: Blaine Christian <blaine () blaines net>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 10:57:57 -0500
On Nov 7, 2005, at 8:32 AM, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
At 9:44 AM -1000 11/6/05, Randy Bush wrote:> A peer should never announce a route it has already announced unlessthat route is withdrawn.one of many counterexamples: change in igp will cause change in med. any attribute changes, and announcement is required. e.g., an internal igp oscillation could cause what the op describes.For the OP, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3345.txt
I give good odds this is not the oscillation issue. More likely a flapping IGP link and a lack of pull-up use (or pull-ups not installed such that link flaps would be non external impacting) etc...
I like pull-ups on all core devices personally...
Current thread:
- BGP terminology question NetSecGuy (Nov 06)
- Re: BGP terminology question Patrick W. Gilmore (Nov 06)
- Re: BGP terminology question NetSecGuy (Nov 06)
- Re: BGP terminology question James Aldridge (Nov 08)
- Re: BGP terminology question Per Gregers Bilse (Nov 08)
- Re: BGP terminology question NetSecGuy (Nov 06)
- Re: BGP terminology question Tony Li (Nov 06)
- Re: BGP terminology question Randy Bush (Nov 06)
- Re: BGP terminology question Howard C. Berkowitz (Nov 07)
- Re: BGP terminology question Blaine Christian (Nov 07)
- Re: BGP terminology question Patrick W. Gilmore (Nov 06)