[j-nsp] BGP full mesh or route reflector

[Saku Ytti]

On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 at 00:05, Johan Borch <johan.borch at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks, this is a quite small network at the moment. Three edge routers (with full tables) and a bunch (9) PE routers (these will be able to handle full table). I guess my only option right now is to run RR on my three edge routers, not sure if that is a good idea.

I don't think it's necessarily problematic. I would personally in same
situation use the edge devices as RR (I would have separate loopbacks
for PE and RR, so I can later move the RR loopback to dedicated RR
host).

> A bunch of virtual RRs sound like a good solution. But we can't add more cost at the moment, is it hard to migrate towards a RR design at a later stage?

Usually not. But in rare cases you may end up building solutions in
full-mesh where you depend on iBGP-IN policy to receive every copy of
routes from far-end, which would be masked by RR, and that solution
would stop working unless addPath or such is added in RR.






-- 
  ++ytti