Good day! sir thank you very much for this content. if it is not too much to ask for the document file that you are using. the link provided is not reachable anymore. THank you in advance.
We should apply the regexp filter-list (as-path access-list ) ) in both direction from R1 to R2 and R1 to R4 in order to prevent routes to and from AS 300, why we are applying it towards R2 neighbor only? response will be appreciated for my clarification :)
The reason he didn't apply R1 to R4 is he created filter list in previous video to block any prefix coming from R4 . Here R1 would receive prefix via R2 only. A timeline 0:45 seconds you can see neighbor 4.4.4.1 filter-list 1 in and out lines which block prefix advertisement to R1 from R4. If this was removed then your argument is correct it should have been applied across 2 neighbors . Hope this makes sense
I'm really grateful to you for this very clear explanation.
you are awesome man
Good day! sir thank you very much for this content. if it is not too much to ask for the document file that you are using. the link provided is not reachable anymore. THank you in advance.
We should apply the regexp filter-list (as-path access-list ) ) in both direction from R1 to R2 and R1 to R4 in order to prevent routes to and from AS 300, why we are applying it towards R2 neighbor only? response will be appreciated for my clarification :)
The reason he didn't apply R1 to R4 is he created filter list in previous video to block any prefix coming from R4 . Here R1 would receive prefix via R2 only. A timeline 0:45 seconds you can see neighbor 4.4.4.1 filter-list 1 in and out lines which block prefix advertisement to R1 from R4. If this was removed then your argument is correct it should have been applied across 2 neighbors . Hope this makes sense