Actually thinking about this, I still need to understand the implications of not taking a full routing table to my setup. So what is the likely impact going to be if I take partial instead of full routing table. Would appreciate any feedback on this. My organisation is only looking at using BGP as a means of failover between two separate upstream ISPs. We are not an ISP.
Thanks Adel On Mon 1:32 PM , a...@baklawasecrets.com wrote: > Thanks, > > I've taken your advice and decided to reconsider my requirement for a > full routing table. I believe I'm being greedy and a partial table will be > sufficient. With regards to Linux/BSD, its not the CLI of quagga that will > be an issue, rather the sysadmin and lack of supporting infrastructure for > Linux boxes within the organisation. So things like package management, > syslog servers, monitoring, understanding of security issues etc. I don't > want to leave them with a linux/bsd solution that they won't be able to > maintain/manage effectively when I am gone. > > Thanks for your comments. Look forward to hearing which solutions come > back into the mix having dropped the full routing table requirement. > > Regards, > > Adel > > On Mon 11:45 AM , Joe Greco wrote: > > > > > > Basically the organisation that I'm working for will not have the > > skills > > > > > in house to support a linux or bsd box. They will have trouble > > > > > with supporting the BGP configuration, however I don't think they > > will be > > > > > happy with me if I leave them with a linux box when they > > > > > don't have linux/unix resource internally. At least with a Cisco > or > > > > > Juniper they are familiar with IOS and it won't be too foreign to > > them. > > > > > > On Sun 11:47 PM , Dale Rumph wrote: > > > > > > > > What does your budget look like? A pair of Cisco 7246vxr's with > G1's > > > > sitting on the edge of the network would be very effective and > still > > allow > > > > expansion. Or you could go up to the 7609. However this gear may be > > > > slightly overkill. You might be ok with a 3660 enterprise and a ton > > of > > > > ram. I have done single sessions on them but not with the level of > HA > > your > > > > looking for. > > > > > > > > Just my 2c > > > > > You will laugh, but the budget at the moment looks like £13k. > > > Impossible? Do only linux and openbsd solutions remain in the mix > > > for this pittance? > > > > No, you have the buy-it-off-eBay solutions as well. "Beware the > > fakes." > > > > If they're familiar with IOS, then they can be familiar with Quagga > > about as easily as they could be familiar with a switch or other > > network gizmo that had a Ciscoesque CLI but wasn't actually Cisco. > > > > You've painted yourself into a corner. I have a word for you: > > > > Reconsider. > > > > I don't care what you reconsider, but reconsider something. You can > > reconsider taking BGP with a full table. You can reconsider Quagga. > > Or you can reconsider your budget. This is the end result of the > > "pick any two" problem. > > > > Most end user organizations have no need of full routes in BGP. To > > try to take them dooms TCAM-based equipment at some future point, > > though if you have a lot of money to throw at it, you can make that > > point be years in the future. It is essentially planned obsolescence. > > If you discard the requirement for full routes, you open up a bunch > > of reasonably-priced possibilities. > > > > Finding someone knowledgeable in BSD or Linux isn't that rough. > > Unlike a Cisco 76xx router, the hardest part of a Quagga-based > > solution is finding the right mix of hardware and software at the > > beginning. PC hardware has a lot going for AND against it. There is > > no reason you can't make a good router out of a PC. If you buy the > > Cisco software-based routers, you're essentially buying a prepackaged > > version, except that it'll be specced to avoid any real competition > > with their low-end TCAM-based offerings. A contemporary PC can > > easily route gigabits. Vyatta makes what I hear is a fantastic > > canned solution of some sort, for a reasonable cost, and they will > > sell just software or software/hardware. If you really can't put > > it together yourself, there's someone to do it for you. > > > > Reconsidering your budget is probably the most painful thing to do, > > but also opens up the "just buy big Cisco" option. I think my point > > here would have to be that what you're looking for would have needed > > big Cisco... ten years ago. Now, dealing with a few hundred megs of > > traffic, that's not that big a deal, the thing that's killing you is > > the BGP table size. > > > > Your best option may be to see if you can settle for partial routes > > plus a default. > > > > ... JG > > -- > > Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - > http://www.sol.net [1] > > [1] > > "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] > > then I > > won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail > > spam(CNN) > > With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many > > apples. > > > > > > > > Links: > > ------ > > [1] http://webmail.123-reg.co.uk/parse.php?redirect=http://www.sol.net > [2] > > > > > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] http://webmail.123-reg.co.uk/parse.php?redirect=http://www.sol.net > [2] > http://webmail.123-reg.co.uk/parse.php?redirect=http://webmail.123-reg.co.u > k/parse.php%3Fredirect%3Dhttp://www.sol.net >
