Aggree with Doug with one condition: RRs do not share cluster ID.
If the two RRs have the same Cluster ID, then one RR does not accept routes
advertised by the other RR which it receives from its clients. It however DOES
accept routes generated by the other RR itself.
As a best practice, keep
While the aforementioned approach (unique IDs and vanilla iBGP in
between) seems a reasonable baseline, the best way in practice depends
on factors like what sort of network the the RRs serve, how much state
they need to hold, whether they are on-line (do carry transit traffic)
or off-line (are
Just looking at the output on the PHP router the S bit is set to 0, so this
means there is at least one additional label present - most likely the VPN
label?
I too would echo what others have that the classification is done before the
POP action. Once the transport label is popped, then the
They are my border routers. having eBGP with upstream providers, and
gateway for the whole network. I want them to be backup of each other. If I
make one of them RR, and that one dies, my iBGP network is gone.
All the devices in the network, whether P or PE should peer with these two
Routers and
On Thu, 7 Feb 2013, Huan Pham wrote:
Lets go back to Ali question, and what he wants:
I want them to send updates to each other and to the RR-Clients.
He will need to have unique RR IDs.
Pls tell me if this is not the case. Thanks.
If you take that statement very literally, then you are
5 matches
Mail list logo
