Oups..., resend after ML police pointed out that message was too heavy.
mh
Le 15/11/2013 18:14, Michael Hallgren a écrit :
> Le 15/11/2013 17:53, Yham a écrit :
>> can you comments on how AS-confederation will benefit more over
>> having all BRs part of single public AS with iBGP peering with nei
Le 15/11/2013 18:14, Dave Curado a écrit :
> Hi Yham,
>
> FYI - I think one of my email messages on this thread didn't go out,
> the body of the message was larger than
> some threshold, and it requires a moderator approval. (they'll get to
> it at some point =-)
>> can you comments on how AS-conf
Hi Yham,
FYI - I think one of my email messages on this thread didn't go out, the
body of the message was larger than
some threshold, and it requires a moderator approval. (they'll get to
it at some point =-)
can you comments on how AS-confederation will benefit more over having
all BRs part
On 11/15/13 11:29 AM, Michael Hallgren wrote:
Le 15/11/2013 17:10, Dave Curado a écrit :
Hi Yham,
Thanks for the map -- your situation is a lot more interesting than it
first appeared!
I agree! :-)
I'm guessing there may be some number of requirements and policy
decisions that went
into thi
Le 15/11/2013 17:10, Dave Curado a écrit :
>
> Hi Yham,
>
> Thanks for the map -- your situation is a lot more interesting than it
> first appeared!
I agree! :-)
> I'm guessing there may be some number of requirements and policy
> decisions that went
> into this. Without knowing all the back sto
Hi Yham,
Thanks for the map -- your situation is a lot more interesting than it
first appeared!
I'm guessing there may be some number of requirements and policy
decisions that went
into this. Without knowing all the back story, it makes it a little
tricky to say what would
be best solution.
Hi Yham,
On the Pro side, you would conserve one ASN by using the same ASN for
both data centers.
Also, if in the future the datacenters were to get some direct
connectivity with each other, it
would be relatively straight forward to join the network control planes
together.
I can't think of
Hi Yham,
Ah. I assumed by your original question that the datacenters were not
interconnected.
It sounds like you should be able to call both your datacenters,
together, a single AS.
You'll want to create a full ibgp mesh, and routing should be relatively
straight forward.
HTHs,
Dave
On 1
Thanks MH you ask this question,
They have direct link between border routers, they have full mpls core
connecting two data centers and there are also direct links at distribution
layer.
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Michael Hallgren wrote:
> Le 15/11/2013 14:18, Yham a écrit :
> > Hi Guys,
Le 15/11/2013 14:18, Yham a écrit :
> Hi Guys,
Hi,
>
> If we have two active/active DataCenters on different geographical
> locations and going to peer with the same provider for internet. What are
> the pros and cons of having same Autonomous Number on both data centers. In
> other word which is
Hi Guys,
If we have two active/active DataCenters on different geographical
locations and going to peer with the same provider for internet. What are
the pros and cons of having same Autonomous Number on both data centers. In
other word which is more scalable and practical, having both data cernte
11 matches
Mail list logo
