7 Mar
2013
7 Mar
'13
12:58 p.m.
Hi Hans On Wed, 06 Mar 2013, Hans van Kranenburg wrote:
I assume you mean to say a.b.1.0/24 instead of a.b.0.1/24?
Yes, sorry.
If there a specific need for advertising the routes you want to send to your eBGP peer also via iBGP?
There's no need to send them via iBGP, but since the iBGP session learns from the central BGP table (t_bgp), it ends up learning them. Is the best solution to create an import filter in the iBGP session, ignoring those prefixes? I was wondering about the behavior difference vs Quagga, where I don't have any iBGP filters but those routes are not learned in the iBGP session. Could this be a consequence of using "gateway direct;" in the iBGP session? Thanks a lot, Andre