[c-nsp] suppress bgp updates?

[Mark Tinka]

On Wednesday, November 24, 2010 03:50:07 am Gert Doering 
wrote:

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

Figured as much. Fair point :-).

> 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]).

Yes, components like those are somewhat lost with iBGP. In 
our case, the trade-off is worth it, given how terribly 
great BGP is at handling thousands of routes.

But most importantly, we use BGP communities extensively on 
customer routes to effect services and billing parametres, 
and this helps a lot (we have a couple of services that 
depend on routes being in iBGP so we can make some money).

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

Yes, we're digressing now - should stay on-topic :-).

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20101124/c803774b/attachment.bin>