[c-nsp] eBGP square vs triangles?

[dpinkard at AccessLine.com]

So what did you decide, Andy?

What are your greater concerns? Router failure? Link failure? How are all 4
connected without respect to BGP? In general, I'd just follow the physical
topology unless there's a reason not to. 

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Andy Taylor
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 1:49 AM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] eBGP square vs triangles?

Hi,

Hopefully a simple eBGP question:

If I have 2 edge routers in an AS, and 2 edge routers in another AS is it
best practices to have them in a square, or triangles?

By this I mean AS1 has router 1 and router 2 (running iBGP between them),
and AS 2 has the same.

Is it best practice to have an eBGP peer between AS1 router 1 <-> AS2
router 1, and AS1 router 2 <-> AS2 router 2, or:

AS1 router 1 peering with AS2 router 1 and 2, and AS1 router 2 peering
with AS2 router 1 and 2.

Either way, can somebody confirm the best practice and why?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

All the best,

Andy
_______________________________________________
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/