[52585] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Clayton Fiske)
Sun Oct 6 16:49:14 2002
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 13:47:58 -0700
From: Clayton Fiske <clay@bloomcounty.org>
To: "nanog@merit.edu" <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0210061621090.21349-100000@ns.istop.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 04:25:00PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>
> A and B are connected via the same multi-access media. It is technically
> possible for B to tell A "you can reach 172.16.16.0/24 on the same media
> that you receive this update on". However what people seem to be saying
> is that there is no dynamic routing protocol that implements this.
There are two solutions to your dilemma:
- Route via B
- Add A to 172.16.16.0/24
It's not a matter of dynamic routing, it's just the way subnets work.
If you want all the hosts to be able to talk to each other directly,
put them all on the same subnet.
That you don't want to accept either solution doesn't mean that there
is no solution. "I want to define subnets, but I want hosts on said
subnets to ignore their boundaries" does not make sense.
-c
