[j-nsp] router reflector clients and non-clients

[Mark Tinka]

On 30/May/18 09:18, Alexander Marhold wrote:

> should reject updates based on the cluster-id attribute).
>
> NO, NO, NO this is the old way of doing redundant RRs
> Never do this as it can lead to missing routing updates if a client A is
> connected to RR-1 only and Client B connected to RR-2 only ( because of link
> outages)
> Therefore---- make each RR with a unique cluster-id ( recommended identical
> to router-id ) and then you can either make a normal ibgp connection between
> both RRs or each one is the client of the other one

You might find this discussion from last March interesting:

    https://www.mail-archive.com/cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net/msg66068.html

Mark.