nanog mailing list archives

Re: Question about experiences with BGP remote-AS


From: Tyler Conrad <tyler () tgconrad com>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 13:14:50 -0600

Neighbor x.x.x.x local-as {whateverasn} no-prepend replace-as

On Friday, May 5, 2017, LF OD <bz_siege_01 () hotmail com> wrote:

We have a number of small routers in co-lo sites that peer with B2B
partners. As more of our partners move to cloud, we are considering a
consolidation effort and putting all of  our peering routers in a cloud
exchange site on a single HA pair of routers. Now, each existing B2B
peering router uses a unique private ASN to EBGP peer with partners and
they, in turn, EBGP peer with our extranet perimeter ASNs for security
vetting and other stuff.


We looked for a medium-density router (or L3-switch) that can replace
multiple small routers (b2b-only, no internet), but we need to retain all
of our existing ASNs and peerings. As it turns out, there are many routers
that can do VRFs but you cannot put a unique ASN on each VRF so replicating
the old environment isn't quite that straightforward. The BGP remote-as
looks to be a possible alternative solution, but we've never used it in
production and we are unsure of the caveats. Taken at face value, it looks
like we can mimic the multi-router/unique-ASN environment we have today on
a single platform. However, networking is rarely as smooth as that so I'm
asking some of the BGP gurus... what are the pros/cons of doing using
remote-as? If anyone here uses it extensively, we could really use some
feedback if you run into challenges or hidden surprises that we wouldn't
normally think of beforehand.


Thanks in advance!


LFOD



Current thread: