[c-nsp] OSPF design (danger will)

[William Cooper]

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet at amorsen.dk> wrote:
> "Christopher J. Wargaski" <wargo1 at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> It just doesn't make sense to run OSPF when all of the links to the
>> remote locations will be running BGP.
>
> Actually it does, in some cases. BGP cannot maintain 2 links to the same
> neighbour, and so it does not work if you have redundant links (except
> for LACP links and similar). That is when you need OSPF so you can peer
> on the loopback addresses.
>
> It is a bit surprising that no one has bothered to make an extension to
> BGP for this purpose, but I guess the OSPF/BGP combination works well
> enough.
>
Doesn't multi-path fulfill this requirement?

Running and IGP is required for next hop resolution (specifically for iBGP,
and sometimes eBGP) right?

>
> /Benny
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>