If both interfaces end on the same router you could use a LAG and just one session.
You can still talk bgp to the remote side and only accept a default from them (if you ask then to send one). Lots of choices... Sent from a mobile device > On 22 May 2016, at 02:02, Satish Patel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Whole reason implementing BGP to have control on null routing IP when under > DDoS. > > I know it's stupid having single provide with BGP. But we are expending and > this is planning for future network. We may have multiple ISP in near future > but currently we have only one. > > We have ASR router to handle full routing table in future. > > Now I have only question if we have two fiber terminated on ASR then how BGP > will do failover or can we do loadbalancing? > > -- > Sent from my iPhone > >> On May 21, 2016, at 11:49 AM, Brian Wallingford <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Still, no need for bgp in a single-upstream environment. You can use a dual >> default, so long as the upstream-facing interface physically (not just >> logically) goes down, which will automatically remove the route. If there >> is an intermediate device between the fiber drop and your router, chances >> are the ethernet will appear up even if connectivity is not, which will be >> problematic as the route will not disappear. In that case, look into IP sla. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On May 20, 2016, at 10:02 PM, Satish Patel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Currently we have single link but in sure if i get second fiber drop >>> from same ISP then can i use it for loadbalacing or failover? In that >>> case what kind of BGP attributes i need to specify? >>> >>>> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Brian Wallingford <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> If you only have a single egress, there's no real advantage to taking a >>>> full table unless you are interested in using it as a learning tool. By >>>> simply using a default, you'll save loads of memory, as well as CPU should >>>> you drop the connection during, e.g., maintenance. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Brian >>>> >>>>> On May 20, 2016, at 5:14 PM, Satish Patel <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Just wonder what would be the advantage and disadvantage of running >>>>> BGP full vs default route. >>>>> >>>>> We have single ISP connection and ISP decided to just run default >>>>> route over BGP instead full. >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
