nanog mailing list archives
Re: BGP and aggregation
From: Stephen Griffin <stephen.griffin () rcn com>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 17:42:49 -0400 (EDT)
In the referenced message, Ralph Doncaster said:
BGP will discard any prefix with its own AS in the path, for loop prevention. Hence, one half of the AS would still be unable to reach the other half. This is why a partitioned AS is a failure condition. A tunnel is a means to keep the AS nonpartitioned.I was thinking of doing iBGP over my transit connections (with a couple of static routes so the iBGP works) AND over my inter-city circuit. Any reason why this won't work? -Ralph
The loss of igp metric will make it untenable at best. Do it over a GRE tunnel, with your regular igp (isis, ospf, eigrp, or shudder rip). default routes have their own problems which only treat the symptoms of a partitioned as, rather than the problem.
Current thread:
- BGP and aggregation Ralph Doncaster (May 11)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Andy Walden (May 11)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Ralph Doncaster (May 11)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Stephen Griffin (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Andy Walden (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Stephen Griffin (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Andy Walden (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Ralph Doncaster (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Andy Walden (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation E.B. Dreger (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Stephen Griffin (May 13)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Ralph Doncaster (May 13)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Scott Granados (May 13)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Andy Walden (May 11)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Ralph Doncaster (May 11)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Scott Granados (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Ralph Doncaster (May 11)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Stephen Griffin (May 12)
- Re: BGP and aggregation Stephen J. Wilcox (May 12)