[j-nsp] Troubleshooting BGP

Stefan Fouant sfouant at gmail.com
Thu Oct 8 17:26:01 EDT 2009

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Kevin Oberman <oberman at es.net> wrote:

> I think this is the right answer. We have always kept IGP and BGP routes
> entirely separate and it has prevented a wide variety of problems. In
> general, keep RIBs as separate as possible. If it's in BGP, don't put it
> in OSPF/ISIS and vice-versa.
> Sites may, in some cases, find it desirable to keep all routes in both
> protocols, but providers probably want to keep the IGP very light with
> only backbone addresses and have filters to make sure that the routes
> don't leak form one to the other.
> --
> R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
> Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
> Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
> E-mail: oberman at es.net                  Phone: +1 510 486-8634
> Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751

I would agree.  I've always been under the impression that the
advertise-inactive was for people who were too lazy to actually fix their
underlying routing issues.  But I'd have to say it certainly came in handy
on more than one occasion during my Juniper lab exams ;)

Stefan Fouant

More information about the juniper-nsp mailing list