""Mike Bernico"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I'm not sure I'm in complete agreement. The network I work for has several > distribution routers that contain around 1000 T1 speed customers. If we > were to static route each of their networks it would add about 1000 to 1500 > lines of router configuration to the router. That would definately add to > our maintenance and provisioning work and make troubleshooting harder on our > techs. While I agree statics are probably the most stable way, I'm not > sure it's necessarily the best way to aggrigate high volumes of customers. > We currently use EIGRP at the edge with the stub command, OSPF or IS-IS > would work just as well. Regardless, we would never let our IGP, that > extends to the CE router, touch their IGP. About 98% of our customers are > not BGP customers though.
Well, what you have just described isn't very different from what HB and Madman have described. It's just that in your case, the CE router is effectively part of your ISP. And since you said yourself that you would never link your ISP's IGP with a customer's IGP, that's pretty much exactly what HB has said, it's just that the 'demarc' is in a different place. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=54563&t=54540 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
