On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:36 AM, Eric A Louie <elo...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Never mind, I just carefully re-read the point. Right, I'll filter the > prefix(es) of the IXP LAN(s) that I'm connected to and not let THAT get out, > no reason to advertise it since no traffic ever goes to it. That still has > me asking to how best to advertise the rest of the public prefixes coming > from the other fabric members. >
on your ibgp peers on 'your-router' you'd have something like: match community <community-added-for-all-ixp-participant-routes> set next-hop-self <http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_q_and_a_item09186a00800949e8.shtml#eleven> for one vendors view of the situation... and there is a link to: <http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a00800c95bb.shtml> that's worth a read. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a00800c95bb.shtml > > > > >>________________________________ >> From: Eric A Louie <elo...@yahoo.com> >>To: Patrick W. Gilmore <patr...@ianai.net>; NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> >>Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 10:22 PM >>Subject: Re: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes >> >> >>Thank you - I will heed the warning. I want to be a good community member >>and make sure we're maintaining the agreed-upon practices (I'll >>re-read/review my agreement with the IXP) >> >> >>So if that is the case, I have to rely on the peering fabric to just return >>traffic, since the rest of my network (save the directly connected router) >>will not know about those routes outbound? And what about my customers who >>are counting on me routing their office traffic through my network into the >>peering fabric to their properties? (I have one specifically who is >>eventually looking for that capability) Do I have to provide them some sort >>of VPN to make that happen across my network to the peering fabric router? >> >> >> >> >>>________________________________ >>> From: Patrick W. Gilmore <patr...@ianai.net> >>>To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> >>>Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 7:11 PM >>>Subject: Re: best practice for advertising peering fabric routes >>> >>> >>>Pardon the top post, but I really don't have anything to comment below other >>>than to agree with Chris and say rfc5963 is broken. >>> >>>NEVER EVER EVER put an IX prefix into BGP, IGP, or even static route. An IXP >>>LAN should not be reachable from any device not directly attached to that >>>LAN. Period. >>> >>>Doing so endangers your peers & the IX itself. It is on the order of not >>>implementing BCP38, except no one has the (lame, ridiculous, idiotic, and >>>pure cost-shifting BS) excuse that they "can't" do this. >>> >>>-- >>>TTFN, >>>patrick >>> >>> >>>On Jan 14, 2014, at 21:22 , Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> >>>wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Cb B <cb.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Jan 14, 2014 6:01 PM, "Eric A Louie" <elo...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a connection to a peering fabric and I'm not distributing the >>>>> peering fabric routes into my network. >>>>>> >>>> >>>> good plan. >>>> >>>>>> I see three options >>>>>> 1. redistribute into my igp (OSPF) >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. configure ibgp and route them within that infrastructure. All the >>>>> default routes go out through the POPs so iBGP would see packets destined >>>>> for the peering fabric and route it that-a-way >>>>>> >>>>>> 3. leave it "as is", and let the outbound traffic go out my upstreams and >>>>> the inbound traffic come back through the peering fabric >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> 4. all peering-fabric routes get next-hop-self on your peering router >>>> before going into ibgp... >>>> all the rest of your network sees your local loopback as nexthop and >>>> things just work. >>>> >>>>>> Advantages and disadvantages, pros and cons? Recommendations? >>>>> Experiences, good and bad? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I have 5 POPs, 2 OSPF areas, and have not brought iBGP up between the >>>>> POPs yet. That's another issue completely from a planning perspective. >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks >>>>>> Eric >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5963 >>>>> >>>>> I like no-export >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >>
