On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 07:24:43PM +0530, Vinod Anthony Joseph Cherunni wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Thanks once again for the advice. Just a few questions.
>
> As far as unnumbered, my .02 is that it's not worth the hassle. Using
> unnumbered to customers means you need to have enough address space in
> your loopback so that you don't have two customers with the same IP
> address connected to the same box. And IP unnumbered in the core your
> network is a Bad Idea; *very* difficult to troubleshoot problems if
> traceroute doesn't tell you anything about which physical link you
> cross.
>
> Question: If I am looking at using IP Unnumbered for NON-MPLS circuits,
> Could'nt I do good with one loopback address per aggregation router?
...but then traceroute through your network doesn't show the links you
cross, only the RIDs. up to you as to whether this is good or bad...
>
> Question: Is it preffered to use IBGP on aggregation routers, & announce
> customer prefixes into the network using IBGP, instead of treating them as
> external / stub links ie in the case of OSPF reducing overhead in the IGP,
> & also reducing the floating of LSA's.
>
I thought this is what Phil and I just got through
un-recommending...:)
eric
> Kindly advice me.
>
> With warm regards,
> Vinod.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:27 EDT