Hi, On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 05:50:45AM +1000, David Hughes wrote: > > On 24/11/2009, at 5:19 PM, Gert Doering wrote: > > > Well, the "two routers" mentioned above are "the core" and "the border > > routers". There *is* only these two :-) > > Well, in that case the only thing I can think of is conditional > advertisement based on the visibility of an iBGP prefix that you > receive from the other router as someone mentioned before.
Sounds like a plan - Router A down -> prefix missing on Router B, remove
external announcement there as well.
"How to build a redundant network that falls off the 'net if *either* router
dies" :-))
> Again, this wouldn't be deterministic and you could quite possibly
> still blackhole traffic but hopefully for a much shorter time. At
> least you'd know that the iBGP session had been established and
> prefixes were flowing even if things hadn't totally reconverged.
"internal routes in OSPF" :-)
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected]
fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected]
pgpJjWXjUloJq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
