DOCSLIB.ORG

9.1. Routing Protocols

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
9.1. Routing Protocols 9.1. Routing Protocols Each organization that has been assigned a network address from an ISP is considered an autonomous system (AS). That organization is free to create one large network, or divide the network into subnets. Each autonomous system is identified by an AS number. This number can be locally administered, or registered if the AS is connected to the Internet. Routers are used within an AS to segment (subnet) the network. In addition, they are used to connect multiple AS’s together. Routers use a routing protocol to dynamically discover routes, build routing tables, and make decisions about how to send packets through the internetwork. Routing protocols can be classified based on whether they are routing traffic within or between autonomous systems. Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) ‐ protocol that routes traffic within the AS. Exterior Gateway Protocol (EGP) ‐ protocol that routes traffic outside of or between AS’s. Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) ‐ enhancement of EGP that routes traffic between AS’s. In this course, you will learn about the following Interior Gateway Protocols (IGP): Routing Information Protocol (RIP) Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (EIGRP) © Sergey Gorokhod MCT/MCSE/MCITP/MCTS/MCSA/CCSE/CCSA/CCNA/A+® E‐mail: [email protected] Mob: (+972) 526848757 9.2. Distance Vector Routing Keep in mind the following principles about the distance vector method. Routers send updates only to their neighbor routers. Routers send their entire routing table. Tables are sent at regular intervals (each router is configured to specify its own update interval). Routers modify their tables based on information received from their neighbors. Because routers using the distance vector method send their entire routing table at specified intervals, they are susceptible to a condition known as a routing loop (also called a count‐to‐infinity condition). Like a bridging loop, a routing loop occurs when two routers share different information. The following methods can be used to minimize the effects of a routing loop. Method Characteristics Using the split horizon method (also called best information), routers keep track of where the information about a route came Split horizon from. Routers do not report route information to the routers on that path. In other words, routers do not report information back to the router from which their information originated. Using the split horizon with poison reverse method (also called poison reverse or route poisoning), routers continue to send information about routes back to the next hop router, but advertise the path as unreachable. If the next hop router notices Split horizon that the route is still reachable, it ignores the information. with poison If, however, the path timeout has been reached, the route is reverse immediately set to unreachable (16 hops for RIP). Convergence happens faster with poison reverse than with simple split horizon. However, it results in greater network traffic because the entire table is broadcast each time an update is sent. With the triggered update method (also known as a flash Triggered updates), routers that receive updated (changed) information updates broadcast those changes immediately rather than waiting for the next reporting interval. With this method, routers broadcast their routing tables periodically, punctuated by special broadcasts if conditions have changed. This method reduces the convergence time. With the hold down method, routers will, for a period of time, "hold" an update that reinstates an expired link. The time period typically reflects the time required to attain convergence on the Hold downs network. The hold down timer is reset when the timer runs out or when a network change occurs. The distance vector method has the following advantages: Stable and proven method (distance vector was the original routing algorithm). Easy to implement and administer. Bandwidth requirements negligible for a typical LAN environment. Requires less hardware and processing power than other routing methods. Distance vector has the following disadvantages: Relatively long time to reach convergence (updates sent at specified intervals). Routers must recalculate their routing tables before forwarding changes. Susceptible to routing loops (count‐to‐infinity). Bandwidth requirements can be too great for WAN or complex LAN environments. © Sergey Gorokhod MCT/MCSE/MCITP/MCTS/MCSA/CCSE/CCSA/CCNA/A+® E‐mail: [email protected] Mob: (+972) 526848757 9.3. Link State Routing Keep in mind the following information about the link state method. Routers broadcast Link‐State Protocols (LSP’s) to all routers (this process is known as flooding). Routers send information about only their own links. Link‐state protocols send hello packets to discover new neighbors. LSP’s are sent at regular intervals and when any of the following conditions occur. o There is a new neighbor. o A neighbor has gone down. o The cost to a neighbor has changed. Neighboring routers exchange LSA’s (link‐state advertisements) to construct a topological database. The SPF algorithm is applied to the topological database to create an SPF tree from which a table of routing paths and associated ports is built. Routers use LSP’s to build their tables and calculate the best route. Routers select routes based on the shortest route using an algorithm known as Shortest Path First (SPF). Network administrators have greater flexibility in setting the metrics used to calculate routes. The link state method has the following advantages over the distance vector method. Less convergence time (because updates are forwarded immediately). Not susceptible to routing loops. Less susceptible to erroneous information (because only firsthand information is broadcast). Bandwidth requirements negligible for a typical LAN environment. Although more stable than the distance vector method, the link state method has the following problems: The link state algorithm requires greater CPU and memory capability to calculate the network topology and select the route because the algorithm re‐creates the exact topology of the network for route computation. It generates a high amount of traffic when LSP’s are initially flooded through the network or when the topology changes. However, after the initial configuration occurs, the traffic from the link state method is smaller than that from the distance vector method. It is possible for LSP’s to get delayed or lost, resulting in an inconsistent view of the network. This is particularly a problem for larger networks, if parts of the network come on line at different times, or if the bandwidths between links vary (i.e. LSP’s travel faster through parts of the network than through others). In particular, the last problem is of greatest concern. The following solutions are often implemented to overcome some of the effects of inconsistent LSP information. Slowing the LSP update rate keeps information more consistent. Routers can be grouped into areas. Routers share information within the area, and routers on area borders share information between areas. (Areas logically subdivide an Autonomous System (AS), a collection of areas under common administration.) One router in each area is designated as the authoritative source of routing information (called a designated router). Each area router receives updates from the designated router. LSP’s can be identified with a time stamp, sequence or ID number, or aging timer to ensure proper synchronization. © Sergey Gorokhod MCT/MCSE/MCITP/MCTS/MCSA/CCSE/CCSA/CCNA/A+® E‐mail: [email protected] Mob: (+972) 526848757 9.4. RIP The Routing Information Protocol (RIP) is a simple, effective routing protocol for small‐ to medium‐sized networks. Be aware of the following facts about RIP: RIP is a distance vector routing protocol. RIP uses split horizon with poison reverse to prevent routing loops. RIP shares its entire routing table at each update interval (except for routes that are not being advertised to prevent routing loops). By default, routing updates are sent every 30 seconds. The invalid timer default is 180, the holddown timer default is 180, and the flush timer default is 240. RIP uses the hop count as the routing metric. The hop count is the number of routers between the source network and the destination network. RIP has a maximum of 15 hops from the source to the destination network. An unreachable network (or a network that is no longer available) is indicated by a hop count of 16. There are two versions of RIP: RIP (version 1), and RIP version 2. o RIP (version 1) uses broadcasts to send routing updates. RIPv2 uses multicasts sent to the multicast address 224.0.0.9. o RIP (version 1) uses only classful routing, so it uses full address classes, not subnets. Autosummarization with RIP happens on default class boundaries. RIPv2 supports VLSM, sends subnet masks in the routing update, and supports manual route summarization. RIP can maintain up to six multiple paths to each network, but only if the cost is the same. It supports load balancing over same‐cost paths. The default is support for up to four equal‐cost routes. Note: Because RIP uses the hop count in determining the best route to a remote network, it might end up selecting a less than optimal route. For example, suppose that two routes exist between two networks. One route uses a 56 Kbps link with a single hop, while the other route uses a Gigabit link that has two hops. Because the first route has fewer hops, RIP will select this route as the optimal route. 9.5. RIP Commands The Routing Information Protocol (RIP) is a simple, effective routing protocol for small‐ to medium‐sized networks. By using a routing protocol, routers automatically share route information, reducing the amount of administration required for maintaining routes between networks. To configure any routing protocol, use the following three steps: 1. Enable IP routing if it is not already enabled (use the ip routing command).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 5 and 6 Routing DV and LS.Pptx
    1/25/10 NAT: Network Address Translation Advantages: • can change address of devices in local network without notifying outside world • devices inside local net not explicitly addressable by or visible to the outside world (a security plus) Disadvantage: • devices inside local net not explicitly addressable by or visible to the outside world, making peer-to-peer networking that much harder • routers should only process up to layer 3 (port#’s are app layer objects) • address shortage should instead be solved by IPv6, instead NAT hinders the adoption of IPv6 (nothing wrong with that?) Lesson: Be careful what you propose as a “temporary” patch, " “temporary” solutions have a tendency to stay around beyond expiration date “The evil that men do lives after them, " the good is oft interred with their bones.” – Shakespeare, Julius Caesar 1 The Internet Network Layer Host, router network layer functions: Transport layer: TCP, UDP Routing protocols Forwarding protocol (IP) addressing conventions • path selection • datagram format • RIP, OSPF, BGP • Network • packet handling conventions layer forwarding “Signalling” protocol table (ICMP) • error reporting • router “signaling” Link layer: Ethernet, WiFi, SONET, ATM Physical layer: copper, fiber, radio, microwave 2 1 1/25/10 Routing on the Internet Routers on the Internet are store and forward routers: • each incoming packet is buffered • packet’s destination is looked up in the routing table • packet is forwarded to the next hop towards the destination routing algorithm local forwarding table dest
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey on Distance Vector Routing Protocols
    A Survey on Distance Vector Routing Protocols Linpeng Tang,∗ Qin Liu† November 5, 2018 Abstract routing loop and count to infinity (CTI) problem. Be- cause each router only has limited information about In this paper we give a brief introduction to five dif- the network topology, routing loops might emerge ferent distance vector routing protocols (RIP, AODV, and lead to CTI problem, greatly impede the effi- EIGRP, RIP-MTI and Babel) and give some of our ciency of the protocol. In this survey we will see how thoughts on how to solve the count to infinity prob- several distance vector routing protocols have worked lem. Our focus is how distance vector routing proto- to alleviate or solve this problem. Distance vector cols, based on limited information, can prevent rout- routing protocols also suffers from security issues, be- ing loops and the count to infinity problem. cause routing computation is done distributively, a malfunctioning or malicious node may severely affect the whole network. However, in recent years more 1 Introduction secure distance vector routing protocols have been proposed [7].Another critical issue is the support for In computer communication theory relating to routing areas. In reality, large networks are typically packet-switched networks, a distance-vector routing divided into areas to accelerate routing, but distance- protocol is one of the two major classes of routing vector routing protocols don’t support routing areas, protocols, the other major class being the link-state so they are not suitable for really big networks. protocol. A distance-vector routing protocol uses In general, distance vector routing protocols are the Distributed Bellman-Ford algorithm to calculate more suitable for small or median sized networks or paths.[13] when each node only have a limited storage or com- Compared to link-state routing protocols, distance- puting power.
    [Show full text]
  • RFC 8966: the Babel Routing Protocol
    Stream: Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) RFC: 8966 Obsoletes: 6126, 7557 Category: Standards Track Published: January 2021 ISSN: 2070-1721 Authors: J. Chroboczek D. Schinazi IRIF, University of Paris-Diderot Google LLC RFC 8966 The Babel Routing Protocol Abstract Babel is a loop-avoiding, distance-vector routing protocol that is robust and efficient both in ordinary wired networks and in wireless mesh networks. This document describes the Babel routing protocol and obsoletes RFC 6126 and RFC 7557. Status of This Memo This is an Internet Standards Track document. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8966. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Route Redistribution
    Understanding Route Redistribution Franck Le Geoffrey G. Xie Hui Zhang Carnegie Mellon University Naval Postgraduate School Carnegie Mellon University [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—Route redistribution (RR) has become an integral option local to a router. It designates the dissemination of part of IP network design as the result of a growing need routing information from one protocol process to another for disseminating certain routes across routing protocol bound- within the same router. For routers in the RIP instance to learn aries. While RR is widely used and resembles BGP in several nontrivial aspects, surprisingly, the safety of RR has not been the prefixes in the OSPF instance, a router (e.g., D or E) needs systematically studied by the networking community. This paper to run both a process of RIP and a process of OSPF and inject presents the first analytical model for understanding the effect the OSPF routes into the RIP instance. of RR on network wide routing dynamics and evaluating the As such, router vendors introduced RR to address a need safety of a specific RR configuration. We first illustrate how from network operations. We recently looked at the configura- easily inaccurate configurations of RR may cause severe routing instabilities, including route oscillations and persistent routing tions of some large university campus networks and found that loops. At the same time, general observations regarding the root RR is indeed widely used. However, contrary to traditional causes of these instabilities are provided. We then introduce a routing protocols, there is no standard or RFC formally formal model based on the general observations to represent defining the functionality of RR.
    [Show full text]
  • Objectives Distance Vector Routing Protocols Characteristics Of
    Objectives Identify the characteristics of distance vector routing protocols. Describe the network discovery process Distance Vector Routing Protocols Identify the conditions leading to a routing loop and explain the implications for router performance. Recognize that distance vector routing Routing Protocols and Concepts– Chapter 4 protocols are in use today 2 ITE PC v4.0 Chapter 1 © 2007 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Cisco Public 1 Distance Vector Routing Protocols Characteristics of Distance Vector routing protocols Examples of Distance Vector routing protocols: Periodic updates Routing Information Protocol (RIP) Neighbors Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (IGRP) Broadcast updates Enhanced IGRP (EIGRP) Entire routing table is included with routing update The meaning of Distance Vector: – A router using distance vector routing protocols knows 2 things: Distance to final destination Vector, or direction, traffic should be 3 4 directed The Routing Algorithm Routing Protocol Characteristics Criteria used to compare routing protocols include: Time to convergence Scalability Resource usage Implementation & maintenance Advantages and Disadvantages of Distance Vector -Simple implementation -Slow convergence and maintenance -Limited scalability -Low resource -Routing loops requirements 5 6 Copyright © 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in USA. Presentation_ID.scr 1 Network Discovery Initial Exchange of Routing Information Router initial start up (Cold Starts) If a routing protocol is configured
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of RIP, OSPF and EIGRP Routing Protocols Based on OPNET
    ENSC 427: COMMUNICATION NETWORKS SPRING 2014 FINAL PROJECT Comparison of RIP, OSPF and EIGRP Routing Protocols based on OPNET Project Group # 9 http://www.sfu.ca/~sihengw/ENSC427_Group9/ Justin Deng Siheng Wu Kenny Sun 301138281 301153928 301154475 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Table of Contents List of Figures………………………………………………………………………….……..….1 Abstract..........................................................................................................................................2 1. Introduction................................................................................................................................3 1.1 Routing Protocol Basics ……….……………………………………...….…………………..3 1.2 Routing Metrics Basics ……………...…..…………………….………………………….….3 1.3 Static Routing and Dynamic Routing ………………………………………………………..3 1.4 Distance Vector and Link State ……………………………………………………………...3 2. Three Routing Protocols………………………………………………….………………..….4 2.1 Routing Information Protocol (RIP) ……….…………………………….…………………...4 2.2 Open Shortest Path First (OSPF)………..…………………….…………………………...….5 2.3 Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (EIGRP) …….....……………………………..7 3. OPNET Simulations………………………………………………………………………......8 3.1 Topologies ……………………………….…………………………………………………...8 3.1.1 Mesh Topology ………..………….……………………………………………………....8 3.1.2 Tree Topology ……………………..……………………………………………………...9 3.2 Simulation Setup …………………………………………………………………………….10 3.2.1 Simulation Setup for Failure/Recovery Configuration...........…………………………...10 3.2.2 Simulation Setup for Individual
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of BGP Path Vector Route Looping Behavior
    A Study of BGP Path Vector Route Looping Behavior Dan Pei Xiaoliang Zhao Dan Massey Lixia Zhang UCLA USC/ISI USC/ISI UCLA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract and policy changes, the interactions between the intra- and inter-domain routing protocols, or even due to subtle im- Measurements have shown evidences of inter-domain plementation details such as the delay between the routing packet forwarding loops in the Internet, but the exact cause table change and the update to the forwarding table which of these loops remains unclear. As one of the efforts in is used to forward packets. A complete understanding of identifying the causes, this paper examines how transient packet looping in the Internet requires an understanding of loops can be created at the inter-domain level via BGP, all the above components and their interactions. As a first and what are the major factors that contribute to duration step in identifying the causes of packet looping in the In- of the routing loops. As a path-vector routing protocol, ternet, this paper solely focuses on understanding routing BGP messages list the entire AS path to each destination loops in path vector routing protocols in general, and in and the path information enables each node to detect, thus BGP in particular. break, arbitrarily long routing loops involving itself. How- Path-vector routing algorithms were designed as an ever, delays due to physical constrains and protocol mecha- improvement over previous distance vector routing algo- nisms slow down routing updates propagation and the rout- rithms.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Dynamic Routing?
    FortiOS™ Dynamic Routing Guide FortiOS™ Handbook 4.0 MR1 FortiOS Dynamic Routing Guide FortiOS™ Handbook 4.0 MR1 23 February 2010 01-41002-112804-20100223 © Copyright 2010 Fortinet, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication including text, examples, diagrams or illustrations may be reproduced, transmitted, or translated in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, manual, optical or otherwise, for any purpose, without prior written permission of Fortinet, Inc. Trademarks Dynamic Threat Prevention System (DTPS), APSecure, FortiASIC, FortiBIOS, FortiBridge, FortiClient, FortiGate®, FortiGate Unified Threat Management System, FortiGuard®, FortiGuard-Antispam, FortiGuard-Antivirus, FortiGuard-Intrusion, FortiGuard-Web, FortiLog, FortiAnalyzer, FortiManager, Fortinet®, FortiOS, FortiPartner, FortiProtect, FortiReporter, FortiResponse, FortiShield, FortiVoIP, and FortiWiFi are trademarks of Fortinet, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners. Contents Introduction 9 Before you begin . 9 How this guide is organized . 9 Document conventions . 10 IP addresses . 10 Notes, tips and cautions . 10 Typographical conventions. 10 CLI command syntax conventions . 11 Registering your Fortinet product. 13 Fortinet products End user license agreement . 13 Fortinet documentation . 13 Fortinet Tools and Documentation CD . 13 Fortinet Knowledge Base . 13 Comments on Fortinet technical documentation . 13 Customer service and technical support . 13 Training . 14 Dynamic Routing Overview 15 Routing concepts . 15 Routing in VDOMs . 15 The default route . 16 The routing table . 16 Viewing the routing table in the web-based manager . 17 Viewing the routing table in the CLI . 19 Viewing the routing table with diagnose commands . 20 Searching the routing table .
    [Show full text]
  • An Advanced Approach for Distance Vector Routing Protocol Babel
    Volume 1, Issue 4, December 2013 ISSN: 2320-9984 (Online) International Journal of Modern Engineering & Management Research Website: www.ijmemr.org An Advanced Approach for Distance Vector Routing Protocol Babel Deshraj Ahirwar Mukesh Kumar Dhariwal Assistant Professor Assistant Professor Department of Computer Science & Engineering Department of Computer Science & Engineering University Institute of Technology, RGPV, University Institute of Technology, RGPV, Bhopal (M.P.) [INDIA] Bhopal (M.P.) [INDIA] Email :[email protected] Email : [email protected] Sanjay Kumar Tehariya Abhishek Kesharwani Assistant Professor Assistant Professor Department of Computer Science & Engineering Department of Computer Science & Engineering University Institute of Technology, RGPV, University Institute of Technology, RGPV Bhopal (M.P.) [INDIA] Bhopal (M.P.) [INDIA] Email : [email protected] Email : [email protected] Abstract—This type of protocols maintains the absence of routing pathologies, such as fresh lists of destinations and their routes by routing loops. periodically distributing routing tables throughout the network. The main disadvantages of such algorithms are: Respective amount of data for maintenance. And Slow reaction on restructuring and failures. It is loop-avoidance vector routing protocol. The Babel routing protocol is a distance-vector routing protocol for Internet Protocol packet-switched network that is designed to be robust and efficient on both wireless mesh networks and wired networks. Keywords:—
    [Show full text]
  • IP Routing: Protocol-Independent Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 15S Americas Headquarters Cisco Systems, Inc
    IP Routing: Protocol-Independent Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 15S Americas Headquarters Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134-1706 USA http://www.cisco.com Tel: 408 526-4000 800 553-NETS (6387) Fax: 408 527-0883 THE SPECIFICATIONS AND INFORMATION REGARDING THE PRODUCTS IN THIS MANUAL ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. ALL STATEMENTS, INFORMATION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS MANUAL ARE BELIEVED TO BE ACCURATE BUT ARE PRESENTED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. USERS MUST TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR APPLICATION OF ANY PRODUCTS. THE SOFTWARE LICENSE AND LIMITED WARRANTY FOR THE ACCOMPANYING PRODUCT ARE SET FORTH IN THE INFORMATION PACKET THAT SHIPPED WITH THE PRODUCT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY THIS REFERENCE. IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO LOCATE THE SOFTWARE LICENSE OR LIMITED WARRANTY, CONTACT YOUR CISCO REPRESENTATIVE FOR A COPY. The Cisco implementation of TCP header compression is an adaptation of a program developed by the University of California, Berkeley (UCB) as part of UCB's public domain version of the UNIX operating system. All rights reserved. Copyright © 1981, Regents of the University of California. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER WARRANTY HEREIN, ALL DOCUMENT FILES AND SOFTWARE OF THESE SUPPLIERS ARE PROVIDED “AS IS" WITH ALL FAULTS. CISCO AND THE ABOVE-NAMED SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THOSE OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT OR ARISING FROM A COURSE OF DEALING, USAGE, OR TRADE PRACTICE. IN NO EVENT SHALL CISCO OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS OR LOSS OR DAMAGE TO DATA ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THIS MANUAL, EVEN IF CISCO OR ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
    [Show full text]
  • Routing Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS XE Everest 16.5.1A (Catalyst 3850 Switches)
    Routing Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS XE Everest 16.5.1a (Catalyst 3850 Switches) First Published: 2017-05-31 Americas Headquarters Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134-1706 USA http://www.cisco.com Tel: 408 526-4000 800 553-NETS (6387) Fax: 408 527-0883 © 2017 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 Configuring Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 1 Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 1 Finding Feature Information 1 Prerequisites for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 1 Restrictions for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 2 Information About Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 2 BFD Operation 2 Benefits of Using BFD for Failure Detection 5 How to Configure Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 5 Configuring BFD Session Parameters on the Interface 5 Configuring BFD Support for Dynamic Routing Protocols 7 Configuring BFD Support for Static Routing 17 Configuring BFD Echo Mode 19 Creating and Configuring BFD Templates 20 Monitoring and Troubleshooting BFD 21 Feature Information for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 22 CHAPTER 2 Configuring MSDP 23 Finding Feature Information 23 Information About Configuring MSDP 23 MSDP Overview 24 MSDP Operation 24 MSDP Benefits 25 How to Configure MSDP 26 Default MSDP Configuration 26 Configuring a Default MSDP Peer 26 Routing Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS XE Everest 16.5.1a (Catalyst 3850 Switches) iii Contents Caching Source-Active State 28 Controlling Source Information that Your Switch Originates 29 Redistributing Sources 30 Filtering Source-Active Request Messages
    [Show full text]
  • Cisco − Redistributing Routing Protocols Table of Contents
    Cisco − Redistributing Routing Protocols Table of Contents Redistributing Routing Protocols......................................................................................................................1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................1 Prerequisites............................................................................................................................................1 Requirements....................................................................................................................................1 Components Used.............................................................................................................................1 Conventions......................................................................................................................................2 Metrics....................................................................................................................................................2 Administrative Distance..........................................................................................................................2 Redistribution Configuration Syntax and Examples..............................................................................4 IGRP and EIGRP..............................................................................................................................4 OSPF................................................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]