On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 8:04 PM James Breeden <ja...@arenalgroup.co> wrote:
> I have been doing a lot of research recently on operating networks with > partial tables and a default to the rest of the world. Seems like an easy > enough approach for regional networks where you have maybe only 1 upstream > transit and some peering. > > I come to NANOG to get feedback from others who may be doing this. We have > 3 upstream transit providers and PNI and public peers in 2 locations. It'd > obviously be easy to transition to doing partial routes for just the peers, > etc, but I'm not sure where to draw the line on the transit providers. > Why draw a line? Just take their directly connected routes + default. If you don’t like traffic mix, filter or play with local pref until you are happy. I've thought of straight preferencing one over another. I've thought of > using BGP filtering and community magic to basically allow Transit AS + 1 > additional AS (Transit direct customer) as specific routes, with > summarization to default for the rest. I'm sure there are other thoughts > that I haven't had about this as well.... > > And before I get asked why not just run full tables, I'm looking at > regional approaches to being able to use smaller, less powerful routers (or > even layer3 switches) to run some areas of the network where we can benefit > from summarization and full tables are really overkill. > It is smart approach and used by many. I would just be sure your ACL / policing needs are met too. > > *James W. Breeden* > > *Managing Partner* > > > > *[image: logo_transparent_background]* > > *Arenal Group:* Arenal Consulting Group | Acilis Telecom | Pines Media > > PO Box 1063 | Smithville, TX 78957 > > Email: ja...@arenalgroup.co | office 512.360.0000 | www.arenalgroup.co >
