On 25Mar2011, at 09.17, Michael Hallgren wrote:
Le jeudi 24 mars 2011 à 14:26 -0700, Bill Woodcock a écrit :
On Mar 24, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Mar 24, 2011, at 3:40 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 24, 2011, at 12:42 PM, Zaid Ali <zaid@zaidali.com> wrote:
I have seen age old discussions on single AS vs multiple AS for backbone and datacenter design. I am particularly interested in operational challenges for running AS per region e.g. one AS for US, one EU etc or I have heard folks do one AS per DC. I particularly don't see any advantage in doing one AS per region or datacenter since most of the reasons I hear is to reduce the iBGP mesh. I generally prefer one AS and making use of confederation.
If you have good backbone between the locations, then, it's mostly a matter of personal preference. If you have discreet autonomous sites that are not connected by internal circuits (not VPNs), then, AS per site is greatly preferable.
We disagree. Single AS worldwide is fine with or without a backbone. Which is "preferable" is up to you, your situation, and your personal tastes.
We're with Patrick on this one. We operate a single AS across seventy-some-odd locations in dozens of countries, with very little of what an eyeball operator would call "backbone" between them, and we've never seen any potential benefit from splitting them. I think the management headache alone would be sufficient to make it unattractive to us.
Experience with a major backbone in the early 2000's that spanned 50 core sites and 4 continents - single AS is not really a problem. We chose IS-IS with wide metrics as the IGP, and one-layer of route-reflection for the bgp mesh control. The only reason I could possibly see doing multi-AS in a general case is if your route policies are different in different regions (i.e. in one region a peer AS is a 'peer' and in another region the same AS is a 'transit' or 'upstream'). You CAN do it with a single AS, but it's more painful...
-Bill
Right. I think that a single AS is most often quite fine. I think our problem space is rather about how you organise the routing in your AS. Flat, route-reflection, confederations? How much policing between regions do you feel that you need? In some scenarios, I think confederations may be a pretty sound replacement of the multiple-AS approach. Policing iBGP sessions in a route-reflector topology? Limits? Thoughts?
Cheers,
mh
--- 李柯睿 Check my PGP key here: https://www.asgaard.org/~cdl/cdl.asc