[c-nsp] Default route pointed to an interface

[a. rahman isnaini r. sutan]

I'm using as well deafult route though receiving full table from upstreams.
This generally to forward the traffic that it might not listed on BGP 
tables.
As once upon a time, one of the client sending huge volume of traffic to 
this "unlisted" destination.

What i'm thinking is,  bogon + bgp table + private ip = whole ipv4 ?

:: a. rahman isnaini r. sutan



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Seth Mattinen" <sethm at rollernet.us>
To: "'Cisco-nsp'" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 2:52 AM
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Default route pointed to an interface


: Justin Shore wrote:
: > This has been talked about before on this list but I'd like to bring it
: > up again for my particular situation.
: >
: > I have a pair of border routers, 1 with 2 upstream connection and the
: > other with a single connection.  I'm pulling down full tables from each
: > provider and have iBGP between the border routers and the core routers.
: >   Each border router has a static default pointed to the outgoing
: > interface for the local upstream connections (2 on one router and 1 on
: > the other).  As expected the router with 2 default routes flops back and
: > forth between the 2 interfaces every second or two.
: >
:
: If you have a full mesh and full tables from your upstreams, what do you
: need default routes for? I only ask because I have a similar setup and I
: have no need for a default route in anything that speaks BGP.
:
: ~Seth
: _______________________________________________
: cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
: https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
: archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
:
:
: -- 
: No virus found in this incoming message.
: Checked by AVG Free Edition.
: Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.11.19/956 - Release Date: 8/16/2007 
9:48 AM
:
: