nanog mailing list archives

Re: layer 3 switch debate


From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 23:55:48 +0200 (CEST)


On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:

On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 11:28:39AM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

Core routers typically don't do any filtering and the BGP setup (if any)
is straightforward, so switch-like routers are good here.

May god have mercy on your core.

Thank you. But what exactly necessitates devine leniency?

You aren't taking my remarks to mean that it's a good idea to redistribute
a full BGP view into an IGP, are you? What I'm getting at is a small setup
where all transit and peering links are in the same location. The border
routers at this location can inject a default into the IGP so the number
of routes in the non-border routers stays nice and small.


Current thread: