nanog mailing list archives
Re: Mikrotik BGP Question
From: Florian Weimer <fw () deneb enyo de>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 17:50:43 +0200
* George Bonser:
Does this really work that well? Won't you still get loops or blackholes unless the eBGP routes on all border routers are identical?As opposed to what, injecting the entire BGP table into your igp?
As opposed to just injecting defaults.
Maybe there is a reason the legacy operator said both uplinks must be connected to the same router. If the two locations are not interconnected, that would be one reason. I don't believe the original poster described their internal connectivity.
There was a follow-up that mentioned that there's a direct connection, so they just have to make the other paths infeasible.
Current thread:
- Re: Mikrotik BGP Question, (continued)
- 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)