nanog mailing list archives

Re: IS-IS reference


From: Dave Cooper <dcooper () gulp org>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 11:58:55 -0700


Ok, first - i wouldn't use cisco.com to learn how to build 
a backbone.  Otherwise, if you buy a Juniper you'll have a 
coronary. And conceptually, the Halabi book works for the 
most part, but there are some differences in how most 
backbones apply those concepts and how they are presented there.

Second - read responses below.

Alex P. Rudnev wrote:

I wonder what are you talking about? How to buil ISP back-bone? 
Open 
www.cisco.com, read BGP topic, and do just as 99% of IS do - IGP f-r the 
inter-router routing, IBGP for the customer's networks, 'network' + 
'static -> Null' on the edges to generate your own aggregates... 

Ok... maybe I didn't specify in detail.. although Randy may ding me
again for being redundant.  sorry randy.

1. if you are going to scale a large national backbone, limit as much
as you can in your IGP. the less fluctation in flooding protocols, the
better.  and since most backbones run on a single area (on the main 
IGP process) or level-2 only, then fluctuations cause headaches for
all participating routers. this is especially so when you have a 
full layer-2 mesh or a full MPLS mesh.

2. if you read what i stated below.... it says, use IBGP for 
statics and connecteds.... then aggregate when possible.  
Sorry if this is too vague.. but i am referring to all other
connections/statics that are not backbone. my use of
the word aggregate did not mean use the aggregate command
in Cisco's bgp, it meant aggregate to a larger netblock (/30's -> /24)
and yes... you use the static->null route to inject it into the 
table and then redistribute into BGP:

        router bgp xxx
        redist static route-map [tag communities and filter]
        redist connected route-map [tag communities and filter] *
                * connected is optional if you can get all 
                  your connecteds into larger aggregates. then
                  they are injected statically.

3. hmm... 99% of the larger backbones do all intra-AS routing using
the IGP.... i think i saw this thread get beaten to death a few months
or a year ago.  this is arguable.


The only problem is the absense of the good config tools for the routers 
with the object library (through new commercial CISCO tools looks not too 
bad, but are very expansive...).

even those aren't ready.


And the second difference is how to use 'communities' to control bgp 
advertisements - for example, add 'PEERING', 'CUSTOMER', 'BACK-UP' 
communities and use them.

thanks... I will remember that.


Very stable, widely used, well debugged schema. 

The hellish things are:

1) 'aggregate' word - use static routing to 'null' everywhere you can 
instead;

see above


2) 'redistribution' from/to IGP - prevent it. Really, the any TO/FROM bgp 
redistribution (except may be static/connected in some cases) is the bad 
thing;

even redistributing static/connected into IGP will increase the IGP's
workload by introducing additional routes, thereby, exhausting more cycles.
again... let IBGP handle that.


3) full IBGP mesh - use reflectors instead.

agree 100%


4) STATIC routing (except the customer's links).

agree 100%


But it's the things all ISP was passed through a lot years ago...


 On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Dave Cooper wrote:

Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1999 16:17:54 -0700
From: Dave Cooper <dcooper () gulp org>
To: Vadim Antonov <avg () kotovnik com>
Cc: nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: IS-IS reference


1. Use IBGP and redistribute connected/static and when you can, aggregate
   those statics/connecteds at each router.
2. Use IGP (IS-IS level-2 or OSPF area0) for the backbone links and
   IBGP, Any-RP loopbacks. Don't add instability to your 
   IGP when you have IBGP that can take care of it much more efficiently. 
   As long as IGP can reach/see each router's loopback, IBGP will
   work great for connecteds/statics (just make sure you don't announce
   these specifics to your peers).
3. Don't use static routing for backbone links.... i am not sure how that
   even came up. Remember this is a NSP of some sorts.
4. Do multicasting, just make sure you get clueful on it.  Its not rocket
   science... and with PIM sparse/dense, its much easier than the DVMRP
   days.  (and make sure you get on a good IOS release and stay off the
   buggy releases)

-dave



Vadim Antonov wrote:

I think the right plan of action should be: a) design numbering plan allowing
aggregation on per-location basis; b) design a dynamically-routed redundant
backbone and c) attach tree-like access networks to the backbobne.

The backbone should not take _any_ routing information from the leaf networks.
It would also help to keep strict access controls, and separate backbone routers
from leaf access routers, so only the authorized backbone engineers can change
things in those.

Leaf networks should do static routing, and no proxy ARP.  This way any damage from
badly behaving hosts or apps is limited to the segment they're on.

And don't do multicasting.

May be we should start defensive networking classes? :)

--vadim



Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)




Current thread: