Re: BGP - weight

[Sven Huster <sven () huster me uk>]

Thanks for anyone who answered.
Guess, we sorted it out now.

Sven

On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 07:31:46PM +0000, E.B. Dreger wrote:
>
...
> SH> As this is a small network internally everything is routed
> SH> via static routes.
>
> Except for the smallest of networks, I try to avoid static
> routes.  It's additional work and opportunity for error.  Using
> BGP + TCP MD5 auth, OSPF auth, hardcoded ARP entries, per-port
> MAC address restrictions, prefix lists, route maps, etc., one can
> run a dynamic network and still keep security under control.
>
>
> SH> R1 and R2 have full BGP views from the transit providers as
> SH> well as partial view from the peers.
>
> Why not arrange the routers and switch in a single VLAN?  (Or did
> I misunderstand your earlier ASCII-art diagram?)  I usually use
> something like:
>
>       10.0.0.1/32  local sinkhole
>       10.0.0.2/28  virtual router (HSRP/VRRP; maybe XRRP now)
>       10.0.0.3/28  physical router #1
>       10.0.0.4/28  physical router #2
>       :       :       :       :       :       :       :
>       10.0.0.13/28 [routing] switch #2
>       10.0.0.14/28 [routing] switch #1
...