[52598] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: iBGP next hop and multi-access media
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ralph Doncaster)
Mon Oct 7 00:10:27 2002
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 00:11:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ralph Doncaster <ralph@istop.com>
To: "jlewis@lewis.org" <jlewis@lewis.org>
Cc: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net>,
"nanog@merit.edu" <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210062353180.20657-100000@redhat1.mmaero.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
>
> > > As others are saying... it isn't "local". It's not "local"
> > > unless in the same subnet. Physical topology often correlates
> > > with higher layers, but it's not strictly 1:1.
> >
> > Manually configuring a static route in router A would achieve the result:
> > ip route 172.16.16.0 255.255.255.0 fa0/0
>
> Why are we doing basic IP routing 101 on NANOG?
OK, since it's so basic why don't you explain how to have router A
dynamically learn from router B that there is a new subnet on the local
ethernet?
> Don't route IP blocks to the ethernet. That's using ARP as your routing
> protocol and it's horribly fragile. I've seen one ISP do that (they were
> very technically challenged) and it's a setup that broke way too easily.
So then what do you call a connected route (for an ethernet interface on a
router)? If you use ethernet, at the edges of your network you HAVE to
route IP blocks to the ethernet.
-Ralph
