There is absolutely no problem accepting full routes from two ISPs providing you have 128M memory in a sufficient router with synchronization disabled, (see earlier post). I have done this several times.
Dave Alex Lei wrote: > That pretty much rules out redistributing into IGP. I am thinking that > Steve's original suggestion is the only way to go, but I feel that there may > be a problem accepting full routes from two different providers. > > Any comments? > > Alex > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I'm no BGP guru, but I would have thought also that > > redistributing *full > > routes* (as opposed to a default) into your IGP might overload > > internal > > routers rather badly. The original poster referred to 2600s > > and 3600s > > inside the AS. > > > > JMcL > > ----- Forwarded by Jenny Mcleod/NSO/CSDA on 05/04/2002 09:36 am > > ----- > > > > > > "Lomker, Michael" > > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 05/04/2002 08:38 am > > Please respond to "Lomker, Michael" > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > cc: > > Subject: RE: BGP question [7:40525] > > > > > > > Why is redistribution into an IGP a big no - no? My > > > understanding is that this is what people usually do. > > > > You'd have to be careful about advertising those routes back > > out to BGP > > again. There was a famous case of someone bringing down the > > Internet by > > creating such a loop. Needless to say, their ISP shouldn't > > have been > > accepting advertisements for networks that the company didn't > > own. -- David Madland CCIE# 2016 Sr. Network Engineer Qwest Communications Inc. 612-664-3367 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40665&t=40525 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
