[c-nsp] bgp & static default route?

[Stephen J. Wilcox]

Hi Matthew,
 I dont think theres a right answer.. personally I'd do it your way, if you want 
the network to be automatic then dont introduce complication with statics. 

If you do add the defaults then it wont make any difference in normal operation, 
but you know your network better than me - consider the possibilities under 
differnet failure modes and what works best (potentially losing some 
connectivity vs potentially sending traffic a bad way into a blackhole)

Sounds like you already made your decision, stick to your guns.

Steve

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, matthew zeier wrote:

> 
> I work at a medium sized ISP with one data center.  Network isn't too 
> large - three upstream providers, ~400Mbps at peak.  There are a pair 
> of routers that connect to the Internet and a pair of routers that 
> customers hang off of directly.
> 
> Management is of the opinion that the best way to run this network is 
> with full BGP routes and static defaults out uplink interfaces 
> redistributed into OSPF.  The thinking process is that if a external 
> peer stops sending me all routes, I still need a way to get out.
> 
> I content that if an external peer stops sending me full routes, why 
> should I send them traffic they don't think they know how to get to?  
> And if all routers are running bgp, I don't see how the static default 
> will ever help unless I lose all external bgp routes at which point 
> there's probably a bigger problem and I'm probably offline.
> 
> When I raise my objections, I'm told "we're not MCI - we need a default 
> route".
> 
> Any comments?  Is this how anyone else runs a network?
> 
> --
> matthew zeier - "Nothing in life is to be feared.  It is only to be
> understood." - Marie Curie
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>