[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

best practice for advertising peering fabric routes

Subject: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
From: saku at ytti.fi (Saku Ytti)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:57:26 +0200
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

On (2014-01-15 08:18 -0600), Leo Bicknell wrote:

> I know a lot of people push next-hop-self, and if you're a large ISP with thousands of BGP customers is pretty much required to scale.

It's actually the polar opposite. If you are small, there are no compelling
reasons to put IXP in IGP.
If you are large, you may wish to have different IGP metric to two egress
points in same peering router. In which case you should at very least have IP
ACL in IXP interface which only allows LAN2LAN.

-- 
  ++ytti

References:
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: elouie at yahoo.com (Eric A Louie)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: bicknell at ufp.org (Leo Bicknell)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: patrick at ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: bicknell at ufp.org (Leo Bicknell)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: patrick at ianai.net (Patrick W. Gilmore)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: rdobbins at arbor.net (Dobbins, Roland)
- best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
  - From: bicknell at ufp.org (Leo Bicknell)

Prev by Date: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
Next by Date: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
Previous by thread: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
Next by thread: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread