nanog mailing list archives
Re: Mikrotik BGP Question
From: joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>
Date: Sun, 23 May 2010 22:26:39 -0700
On 2010-05-23 18:55, Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Dear Lorell,We will implement OSPF.so what arguments speak against 2 bgp upstreams?
It's not an either or proposition...ospf carries your internal routes, ibgp carries you external routes between internal routers. you can carry default around in either in fact you probably should since routers that don't need a nuanced view of the outside world don't need to carry such a big table.
Kind regards, Ingo Flaschberger
Current thread:
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question, (continued)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question Dennis Burgess (May 24)
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question Martin List-Petersen (May 25)
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question Christopher Morrow (May 21)
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question Choprboy (May 21)
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question joel jaeggli (May 21)
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question Ingo Flaschberger (May 21)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question Lorell Hathcock (May 22)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question Ingo Flaschberger (May 22)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question Lorell Hathcock (May 22)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question Ingo Flaschberger (May 23)
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question joel jaeggli (May 23)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question George Bonser (May 23)
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question Florian Weimer (May 24)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question George Bonser (May 24)
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question Florian Weimer (May 24)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question Lorell Hathcock (May 22)
- RE: Mikrotik BGP Question Lorell Hathcock (May 24)