[c-nsp] suppress bgp updates?

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 09:43:11PM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 23, 2010 09:13:58 pm Gert Doering 
> wrote:
> 
> >  - customer has PI, wants *us* to announce it, no other
> > ISP involved -> we announce their /24 (e.g.), have a
> > static null-route for that, and all interiour routing
> > happens on the two /25s.
> > 
> >    customer network is at all times seen originated by
> > our AS.
> 
> In this case, don't you end up with a bloated IGP if you 
> have several customers requiring this kind of topology?

"IGP" could be "iBGP + no-export".  "Whatever interiour routing is used".


> Y'know, the whole, "Customer's prefixes in iBGP, 
> infrastructure in IGP" and all that good stuff :-).

We actually do that (and we're not happy - BGP is far too limited for 
proper internal route control, things like "automatically pick up the
configured bandwidth for a connected route and Do The Right Thing for
master/backup interfaces", and also now we're having routing hickups
router reboots for internal routes [no "overload bit" for EIGRP]).

But that part is really independent of the original question, so I
didn't go into details here...

gert

-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20101123/a67c3e5f/attachment.bin>