[c-nsp] BGP advertisements more specific than IGP

[Randy]

please consider using *Communities* to influence inbound (harder and more so farther up-stream..I understand!)but, the dfz is already bloated!
./Randy

--- On Thu, 2/28/13, James Urwiller <jurwiller at americanbb.com> wrote:

> From: James Urwiller <jurwiller at americanbb.com>
> Subject: [c-nsp] BGP advertisements more specific than IGP
> To: "cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Date: Thursday, February 28, 2013, 7:11 PM
> I have a BGP multi-homed invironment
> that I am having problems balancing inbound traffic, besides
> prepends which don't seem to be helping anymore, I have
> heard that announcing my networks more specifically could
> also influence inbound traffic.  My question is, for
> example… If I have a /23 that I am using as a /23 in OSPF,
> can I announce that in BGP more specifically (2,
> /24's)  without having to them break it up internally
> as well?  What I foresee happening is this..
> 
> Example:
> BGP:
> Network 192.168.0.0/24
> Network 192.168.1.0/24
> 
> OSPF:
> Network 192.168.0.0/23
> 
> I would think in this scenario, the IP addresses 192.168.1.0
> and 192.168.0.255 would not have a route in BGP, even though
> they are valid addresses for use when used as a /23. 
> Since I would be multi-homed, I would still advertise the
> network as the aggregate /23 on the circuit I don't want to
> take as much traffic, so would those IP addresses in this
> scenario still work, but only through the circuit I
> advertise as the aggregate??
> 
> James Urwiller
> Network Operations Manager
> CCNA 11567125
> American Broadband
> 402-426-6257 - Office
> 402-278-1875 - Cell
> 402-426-6273 - Fax
> jurwiller at americanbb.com<mailto:jurwiller at americanbb.com>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>