[39435] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cisco RFC1997 implementation clarification.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marko Karppinen)
Tue Jul 10 05:03:06 2001
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 12:02:36 +0300
From: Marko Karppinen <marko.karppinen@magentasites.com>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
Message-ID: <B7709F5C.9E30%marko.karppinen@magentasites.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107100005110.8099-100000@Overkill.EnterZone.Net>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> While researching an RFC1997 issue this morning, I made the following
> observations:
> CISCO no-export = RFC1997 NO_EXPORT_SUBCONFED
> CISCO local-as = RFC1997 NO_EXPORT
Cisco Press' Routing TCP/IP, Vol 2 explicitly states that
LOCAL_AS == NO_EXPORT_SUBCONFED. It's description of LOCAL_AS differs,
however, from the one you quoted from a Cisco web page:
"LOCAL_AS (4294967043, or 0xFFFFFF03) -- RFC 1997 calls this attribute
NO_EXPORT_SUBCONFED. Routes received carrying this value cannot be
advertised to EBGP peers, including peers in other autonomous systems within
a confederation."
My money is on the Cisco web page you quoted being wrong.
Marko
--
>> Magenta Sites
Marko Karppinen
