BGP routes [7:71442]
Dear all What is the benefits of receiving the following BGP routes 1. Full routes 2. Partial routes 3. No routes Regards, kws Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71442&t=71442 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP routes [7:71442]
I would assume "Convergence" and the avoidance of this: http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/770/fn12942.html -Justin M. Morgenthaler ""KW S"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Dear all > > What is the benefits of receiving the following BGP routes > 1. Full routes > 2. Partial routes > 3. No routes > > Regards, kws Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71451&t=71442 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP routes [7:71442]
i have configured all three for differant requirements. There is no benefit per se, it simply depends on the what your trying to accomplish and how your connected. Dave Justin M. Morgenthaler wrote: > I would assume "Convergence" and the avoidance of this: > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/770/fn12942.html > > -Justin M. Morgenthaler > > ""KW S"" wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Dear all >> >>What is the benefits of receiving the following BGP routes >>1. Full routes >>2. Partial routes >>3. No routes >> >>Regards, kws -- David Madland CCIE# 2016 Sr. Network Engineer Qwest Communications 612-664-3367 "Government can do something for the people only in proportion as it can do something to the people." -- Thomas Jefferson Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71481&t=71442 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP routes [7:71442]
""KW S"" wrote in message ... > What is the benefits of receiving the following BGP routes > 1. Full routes > 2. Partial routes > 3. No routes Well #3 means it doesn't work (you need at least a default route, or 0.0.0.0/0), so I'll skip that one... Full routes from two or more providers, with no default route: Benefits - Ability to move any prefix/AS for outbound traffic to any of the providers. Abilty to optimize/maximize loose-mode uRPF features. Ability to optimize/maximize prefix-filters/distribute-lists if you are a transit-AS. Ability to route 0.0.0.0/0 to Null0, aka "The Default Free-Zone, or DFZ" Drawbacks - More routes = more CPU and memory requirements on your routers. However, scaling with today's equipment and a few good configurations makes this a very small issue compared to the power you gain Application - Tier 1 Internet Provider that doesn't receive partial routes from anyone and gets a full routing table from all peers Some Full routes, some Partial routes, no defaults: Benefits - Ability to move any prefix/AS on providers receiving full routes and some ability to move onto providers sending partial routes. Ability to route 0.0.0.0/0 to Null0, which is sort of like "default-free" Drawbacks - Can't use loose-mode uRPF on all providers (but could build a complicated strict-mode uRPF for the partial route providers). Prefix-lists and distribute-lists also become more complicated if you are a transit-AS Application - Tier 2 Internet Providers, Content Providers, any company with IP clue Partial routes from two or more providers, with partial+default route from one provider: Benefits - Ability to move around some prefixes/ASes for outbound traffic to the providers that will take that prefix/AS. Ability to send the rest of your traffic out the default route to the one provider Drawbacks - Restriction to send the rest of your traffic out the default route of only one provider Application - Companies with IP clue that don't have the money to keep all routers configured properly or with enough memory to hold full tables with multiple views Partial routes from two or more providers, with more than one provider sending partial+default routes: Benefits - Ability to move around some prefixes/ASes for outbound traffic to the providers that will take that prefix/AS. Ability to send the rest of your traffic out any of the default routes from the providers you are getting defaults from Drawbacks - More than one default route can be confusing to deal with Application - Companies that don't understand how partial+default works Partial routes from one or more providers, with another single provider providing only a default route: Benefits - As Partial, with partial+default from one provider, only that provider doesn't send partial routes. Drawbacks - Restriction to default route for rest of traffic Application - Companies with IP clue, but very little money and resources (read: only have Cisco 2500 routers or equivalent) Default routes from two or more providers with no full/partial routes: Benefits - you are multihomed (not reliant on one Internet provider), but only in the smallest sense of the term Drawbacks - no ability to influence traffic Applcation - Companies who are willing to spend the extra cost associated with two providers, but aren't willing to upgrade their Cisco 2500 router that has 2MB DRAM -dre Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71484&t=71442 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: BGP routes [7:71442]
Hi, Full Routes : That's for your router to maintain anyAS-to-anyAS routing info . If you recv full routes from your ISP then it's more of a disadvantage / overhead . That's so because you'll have to have loads of RAM and CPU power in your ROUTER connecting to the ISP to maintain those routing tables. And there's this problem of instability in another AS ( with which you'd be least bothered ) causing route flaps and interrupts on your BGP router . This issue can be addressed by route summarization and dampening to a good extent . Partial routes : This is typically the case when you are configured to receive only the routes of customers' AS that you'd like to reach and a default route to reach the other AS through your ISP . This reduces the size of your routing table and causes less damage to your BGP router as well as compared to the router receiving full routes . No routes : This is typically like ( if I'm permitted to call !! ) a Totally Stubby Area in the case of OSPF . Your BGP router doesn't recv anything but a default route from your ISP and you don't have much knowledge about any other route. Hope this helps..!! Regards, Srivathsan A -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: BGP routes [7:71442] Dear all What is the benefits of receiving the following BGP routes 1. Full routes 2. Partial routes 3. No routes Regards, kws Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71509&t=71442 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP routes [7:71442]
dre wrote: > ""KW S"" wrote in message ... > >>What is the benefits of receiving the following BGP routes >>1. Full routes >>2. Partial routes >>3. No routes > > > Well #3 means it doesn't work (you need at least a default route, or > 0.0.0.0/0), so I'll skip that one... Sure it works, you can configure BGP and recieve no routes but dynamically control your announcements. Dave David Madland CCIE# 2016 Sr. Network Engineer Qwest Communications 612-664-3367 "Government can do something for the people only in proportion as it can do something to the people." -- Thomas Jefferson Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71526&t=71442 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
