Hi Shane, for the boxes that are currently installed in the network, this is not a valid option (politically/commercially speaking).
thanks, Marco On 1 August 2015 at 18:16, Shane Ronan <sh...@ronan-online.com> wrote: > Have you considered a virtual route reflector rather than physical > hardware? > On Aug 1, 2015 11:39 AM, "marco da pieve" <mdapi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> this is my first time in asking for advices here and I hope not to bother >> you with this topic (if it has been already covered in the past, would you >> please please point me to that discussion?). >> >> Anyway, I need to decide whether to go for a BGP topology with a single >> cluster of 3 Route Reflectors (to overcome a dual point of failure issue) >> or maybe to two standalone clusters each with two RR (sacrificing half of >> the network in case two RR of the same cluster fail). >> >> To give you some input data: >> >> - 8000 actual VPNV4 prefixes >> - 180 BGP neighbors >> >> In case of the 3 RRs option, prefixes will become 24000 on the clients >> (24k >> received routes in total but 1/3 installed. No BGP multipath will be >> used). >> In this scenario considering network growth up to doubling the current >> number of VPNV4 prefixes, I would end up to have 16k actual vpnv4 prefixes >> and 48k vpnv4 prefixes received by the clients, which is almost the limit >> for the HW used. >> >> In the case of two standalone clusters each with two RRs, BGP >> neighborships >> will be halved among the two clusters and vpnv4 prefixes too. In case of >> network growth up to doubling the number of prefixes, the clients will >> receive up to 24k vpnv4 prefixes and this is still far below the HW >> limits. >> Of course this option will not prevent a dual failure in the single >> cluster >> and half of the network would end up in outage. >> >> My choice would be to go for the two clusters assuming that each RR has >> supervisor/controlling card protection capabilities. >> >> However I'd like to have a feedback on the pros and cons on the design >> itself if any. I know that design is planned on the resources available >> but >> just for discussing and abstracting from the HW, would there be any >> drawbacks in having an odd number of RR in the network? is one of the two >> option a no to go choice? what was your experience? >> >> thanks a lot for your time and patience to go through this email, >> >> M. >> > -- Marco Da Pieve