<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Border nodes link in Software-Defined Access (SD-Access)</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4164333#M897</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Firstly, Per VRF ibgp neighborship between the two borders is required only if your northbound connections arent full mesh.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If your borders are C9K switches, then a Layer 2 Port-channel(trunk) with Per VRF iBGP running on SVI would suffice... &amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Mahesh&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 18:50:52 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mnagired</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-10-09T18:50:52Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Border nodes link</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4163889#M891</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Very simple question :&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If I have 2 border nodes with 2 links between them&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is the configuration between the two nodes going to be automated by dnac as an l2 portchannel or an l3 portchannel?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Or should i configure it myself ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 02:50:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4163889#M891</guid>
      <dc:creator>taytibob</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-09T02:50:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Border nodes link</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4163905#M893</link>
      <description>It’s Manual configuration.. No automation between two borders..&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 03:38:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4163905#M893</guid>
      <dc:creator>mnagired</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-09T03:38:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Border nodes link</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4163920#M895</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Ok. Then what's the recommendation l2 or l3 ?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 04:34:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4163920#M895</guid>
      <dc:creator>taytibob</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-09T04:34:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Border nodes link</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4164333#M897</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Firstly, Per VRF ibgp neighborship between the two borders is required only if your northbound connections arent full mesh.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If your borders are C9K switches, then a Layer 2 Port-channel(trunk) with Per VRF iBGP running on SVI would suffice... &amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Mahesh&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2020 18:50:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/software-defined-access-sd-access/border-nodes-link/m-p/4164333#M897</guid>
      <dc:creator>mnagired</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-10-09T18:50:52Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

