Mark Tinka wrote:
On 22/Jan/16 22:28, Joe Maimon wrote:
I like that setup. And it never struck me as crazy. In fact, their implementation avoids all multihop setup shortcuts and is quite purist from a routing standpoint.
First time I've heard that...
Mark.
No static routes, dedicated BGP routed loopbacks on each side from an allocated /31, strict definitions on which routes belong to which session. Its gone about very properly. In my opinion, that setup is a very good example of how and when to properly take advantage of a BGP feature that has been with us from the start. And really, whats wrong with the ability on your side to decide when and where on your network you will take a full feed of ever expanding internet routes. On your edge? On a purpose built route server? Or do you think the only paths forward for everyone's edges is continuous forklifting and/or selective filtering? I suspect that people are as much wary of the flexibility made available to them as they are to the "complexity" imposed via this approach. Joe