Someone should advise him that if he wants to take in a full BGP routing table
that he makes sure his router can handle it! I would hate for him to open the
floodgates
and his production router shuts down. LOL....
> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:12:18 -0600
> From: jba...@brightok.net
> To: b...@herrin.us
> Subject: Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover
> CC: ayousuf0...@gmail.com; nanog@nanog.org
>
>
>
> On 1/18/2011 1:00 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> > IMO, that would be a mistake. Taking significantly less than a full
> > table severely limits your options for balancing traffic between the
> > links.
> >
>
> It should also be noted that taking a full table, doesn't mean you have
> to use the full table. Apply filters to smaller routes or long ASPATHs
> that you don't want, and then assign preferences, communities, prepends,
> etc as necessary for the routes you actually accept.
>
> This means your sync time is longer and you'll have more updates, but it
> will still keep the local routing table much lower.
>
>
> Jack
>
