[c-nsp] BGP Peer Group drawbacks???

[Kenny Sallee]

On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Marko Milivojevic <markom at ipexpert.com>wrote:

> > Seems to me that peer/session templates would allow you to get more
> granular
> > with your BGP configuration then peer-groups due to
> > their inheritance feature.  So it makes sense to me.
>


> >Well... comparing peer-groups and templates is just a little bit like
> >comparing apples and oranges. They were meant to solve different
> >problems.
>
>
I wouldn't say it's quite like apple and oranges for where they stand today
though - both are used to group configuration commands and both help to
solve BGP table scanning and update resource utilization issues..and they
both do it via BGP Dynamic Updates 'in the background' as Artur stated.
 However, templates allow you to get much more granular with your routing
policies.  It's more like comparing red apples to green apples - green are
more sour (peer groups).  I do get the rest of your point and history - it's
well stated.

Thanks,
Kenny