Jon Marshall Tue, 03/06/2007 - 00:54
User Badges:
  • Super Blue, 32500 points or more
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

  • Cisco Designated VIP,

    2017 LAN, WAN

Hi


They aren't propogated under normal circumstances to avoid routing loops. EBGP can use the AS Path in the routing update to ensure that there are not routing loops ie. if the router sees it's own AS in the AS Path it knows there is a potential routing loop and so will not accept the route under normal circumstances.


Because the AS Path does not get changed when routes are exchanged between IBGP peers the router has no way of knowing if there is a potential routing loop.


HTH


Jon

Christopher007 Tue, 03/06/2007 - 01:05
User Badges:

Ok, this makes sense. Since an IGP is responsible for forwarding the updates between the iBGP peers, wouldn't it be the IGPs responsiblity to ensure no loops to get to the next AS hop. The only problem I can see with iBGP forwarding updates to other iBGP neighbors is possibly sub-optimal routing to get to the nearest "edge" BGP peer.

Jon Marshall Tue, 03/06/2007 - 01:13
User Badges:
  • Super Blue, 32500 points or more
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

  • Cisco Designated VIP,

    2017 LAN, WAN


It can't really be the IGP's responsibility because it is just another bit of IP traffic to the IGP. And the IBGP speaking router stores the updates in a separate table - the BGP table. Only then will it decude whether to install it in the IGP routing table.

Before this the IGP is used merely to transport some tcp traffic between 2 routers.


HTH


Jon



Actions

This Discussion