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 639 Lessons. More Lessons Added Every Week!
  • Content created by Rene Molenaar (CCIE #41726)

 

341 New Members signed up the last 30 days!

satisfaction-guaranteed

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


Forum Replies

  1. What about this method, Rene?

    access-list 1 permit 1.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
    
    route-map NO-EXPORT permit 10
      match ip address 1
    
    neighbor 192.168.12.2 route-map NO-EXPORT out
    neighbor 192.168.13.3 route-map NO-EXPORT out
    

    Ofc we can use “match ip address prefix-list” as well. And my deepest respect for all what you do for us all.

  2. Hello Rene,

    Great job as always, it is possible if you publish the routers configurations? I would like to see how you did the configuration, this also helps me clearing the theory.

    It’s just a question.

    Thank you very much!!

  3. Jason,
    This is actually a very good question which required wireshark and some musing on my part to figure out.

    Here’s the short answer:
    If you included R1’s AS in the filter:
    R1(config)#ip as-path access-list 1 permit ^4444$
    It would indeed stop ISP1 and ISP2 from using R1 as a transit path. However, there is also a negative consequence. R1’s advertisements to ISP1 and ISP2 would also be filter out.

    Here’s the long answer:
    The interesting question is why does it do this? To answer this question, the first point to understand is what the ip as-path command i

    ... Continue reading in our forum

  4. hello Rene, I am a bit confused, No-Export community tells BGP neighbors to advertise a prefix only to iBGP neighbors so why if we use the “no-export” community we still need to use the command “send-community”? it should still export the prefixes to iBGP based on the no-export community… am I wrong?

  5. oh, now I see, I confused the export of the community with the prefixes :slight_smile: so no export will make sure we won’t expotr the prefix but then we need send community to make sure the “no export” is propagated?

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