nanog mailing list archives
Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP
From: Michael Hallgren <m.hallgren () free fr>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:43:19 +0200
Le 12/06/2014 18:39, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu a écrit :
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 09:25:20 -0700, Philip Lavine said:need some guidance on best practicesWhat the vendor says is best practices, or what people in the trenches
say?
Is it more efficient to use RR or Confederation?If option A is 2% more "efficient" than option B, but takes 10% longer to deploy and causes 3% more SLA payouts to your customers when the added complexity causes a whoopsie, how much more work could you have gotten
done in
the time you spent in an uncomfortable meeting explaining to upper
management
why the whoopsie happened? (Sorry, it's been that sort of week :)
:-) Now, Philip, I think along the same path as Vladis: it depends... What does your physical or layer 2 network look like? How do you expect packets to move around inside, and in and out, of that topology? You need policing? How much and of what, etc, etc...? I'm quite often a fan of confed's, if the network is young thus ``easy'' migration, but there are scenarios... Please provide more detail to this mail thread or one-to-one if you prefer. Cheers, mh
Current thread:
- Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP Philip Lavine (Jun 12)
- Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 12)
- Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP Michael Hallgren (Jun 12)
- Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP Philip Lavine (Jun 18)
- Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP George, Wes (Jun 18)
- Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP Michael Hallgren (Jun 18)
- Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP Mark Tinka (Jun 18)
- Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP Michael Hallgren (Jun 12)
- Re: Help with Confederation-RR-MPBGP Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 12)