Someone should advise him that if he wants to take in a full BGP routing table that he makes sure his router can handle it! I would hate for him to open the floodgates and his production router shuts down. LOL....
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:12:18 -0600 From: jbates@brightok.net To: bill@herrin.us Subject: Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover CC: ayousuf0079@gmail.com; nanog@nanog.org
On 1/18/2011 1:00 PM, William Herrin wrote:
IMO, that would be a mistake. Taking significantly less than a full table severely limits your options for balancing traffic between the links.
It should also be noted that taking a full table, doesn't mean you have to use the full table. Apply filters to smaller routes or long ASPATHs that you don't want, and then assign preferences, communities, prepends, etc as necessary for the routes you actually accept.
This means your sync time is longer and you'll have more updates, but it will still keep the local routing table much lower.
Jack