We're Sorry, Full Content Access is for Members Only...

If you like to keep on reading, Become a Member Now! Here is why:

  • Learn any CCNA, CCNP and CCIE R&S Topic. Explained As Simple As Possible.
  • Try for Just $1. The Best Dollar You've Ever Spent on Your Cisco Career!
  • Full Access to our 651 Lessons. More Lessons Added Every Week!
  • Content created by Rene Molenaar (CCIE #41726)

451 Sign Ups in the last 30 days

100% Satisfaction Guaranteed!
You may cancel your monthly membership at any time.
No Questions Asked!

Tags: , ,

Forum Replies

  1. Nice article, Rene!

    I am sure you are gonna create another article about ““dirty” tricks like AS override, allow AS in or remove private AS.” since CCIE is all about details and details and more details.



  2. Michael,
    In both environments, the iBGP route-reflector should not change the next hop attribute, and the reason in both cases is the same. By having the RR change the next hop, the RR would necessarily be putting itself in the data plane. In most cases, it is preferable to have the RR act only in the control plane so the most efficient path can be taken.

    The tricky part about BGP in a DMVPN environment is accounting for knowledge of the next hops by all BGP clients. As you know, in BGP, if an advertised route has an inaccessible next hop, BGP will not insta

    ... Continue reading in our forum

  3. Great article

    quick question concerning the ebgp configuration, i can see that in the routing table the next hop is not passing through the hub. however i can see that the AS path still mention the hub …even if the next hop is not the hub.
    is it the normal behavior ?

  4. Hello Fethi,

    That is correct yes. eBGP doesn’t change the next hop address.


6 more replies! Ask a question or join the discussion by visiting our Community Forum