nanog mailing list archives
Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer
From: Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 11:24:45 +0100
On 14/07/2014 18:32, Jeff Tantsura wrote:
BGP to RIB filtering (in any vendor implementation) is targeting RR which is not in the forwarding path, so thereĀ¹s no forwarding towards any destination filtered out from RIB. Using it selectively on a forwarding node is error prone and in case of incorrect configuration would result in blackholing.
there are other drawbacks too: the difference in convergence time between < 24k prefixes and a full dfz is usually going to be large although I haven't tested this on an me3600x yet. Also these boxes only have 1G of memory might be a bit tight as the dfz increases. For sure, it's already not enough on a bunch of other vanilla ios platforms. Nick
Cheers, Jeff -----Original Message----- From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu> Organization: SEACOM Reply-To: <mark.tinka () seacom mu> Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2014 at 1:56 PM To: "nanog () nanog org" <nanog () nanog org> Subject: Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customerOn Monday, July 07, 2014 08:33:12 PM Anurag Bhatia wrote:In this scenario what is best practice for giving full table to downstream?In our case, we have three types of edge routers; Juniper MX480 + Cisco ASR1006, and the Cisco ME3600X. For the MX480 and ASR1006 have no problems supporting a full table. So customers peer natively. The ME3600X is a small switch, that supports only up to 24,000 IPv4 and 5,000 IPv6 FIB entries. However, Cisco have a feature called BGP Selective Download: http://tinyurl.com/nodnmct Using BGP-SD, we can send a full BGP table from our route reflectors to our ME3600X switches, without worrying about them entering the FIB, i.e., they are held only in memory. The beauty - you can advertise these routes to customers natively, without clunky eBGP Multi-Hop sessions running rampant. Of course, with BGP-SD, you still need a 0/0 + ::/0 route in the FIB for traffic to flow from your customers upstream, but that is fine as it's only two entries :-). If your system supports a BGP-SD-type implementation, I'd recommend it, provided you have sufficient control plane memory. Cheers, Mark.
Current thread:
- Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Anurag Bhatia (Jul 07)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Jason Lixfeld (Jul 07)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Mark Tinka (Jul 08)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Mark Tinka (Jul 08)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Mark Tinka (Jul 08)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Jeff Tantsura (Jul 14)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Nick Hilliard (Jul 17)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Mark Tinka (Jul 27)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Mark Tinka (Jul 17)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Anurag Bhatia (Jul 19)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Jeff Tantsura (Jul 14)
- Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer Jason Lixfeld (Jul 07)