.jpg "Opportunities, Appliacation, Openings"){kind=small}
.jpg "Hand Job, Blow Job, Job Search, Monster Job"){kind=small}
.jpg "pusat resume, daftar kerja, cari kerja"){kind=small}
.jpg "Project Manager, SOftware Engineer, SAP Consultant"){kind=small}
Question regarding Confederations and when to use next-hop-self
That all depends on what you are doing.
If you follow the spec with ebgp peering, you are using a directly connected physical interface to peer with. In a non-confederation scenario, NH will get overwritten anyway which is the same as what NHS does.
In a confederation scenario, when to use it or not depends on whether your externally facing link addresses are known within the confederation (e.g. is it a valid next hop, or are you getting failures?). Do what needs to be done in order to achieve the reachability that you’d like to! 
HTH,
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, JNCIE-M #153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al. CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-ER VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc. IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
smorris@ipexpert.com
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 Fax: +1.810.454.0130 http://www.ipexpert.com
—–Original Message—– From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Peter Grewal Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:07 AM To: ccielab@groupstudy.com Subject: Question regarding Confederations and when to use next-hop-self
Guys,
Could someone please provide some clarification as to when to use next-hop-self between AS’s within a BGP confederation. I understand that when you set up the confederation that the peering arrangement is eBGP based, but the actual route processing takes place as similar to iBGP. On that assumption, would I only place next-hop-self on routers that have peering relation with EBGP peers that are outside the confederation, if I require NLRI ?
Thank you.
Peter.
