Mark Tinka wrote:
On 22/Jan/16 22:28, Joe Maimon wrote:
I like that setup. And it never struck me as crazy. In fact, their
implementation avoids all multihop setup shortcuts and is quite purist
from a routing standpoint.
First time I've heard that...
Mark.
No static routes, dedicated BGP routed loopbacks on each side from an
allocated /31, strict definitions on which routes belong to which
session. Its gone about very properly.
In my opinion, that setup is a very good example of how and when to
properly take advantage of a BGP feature that has been with us from the
start.
And really, whats wrong with the ability on your side to decide when and
where on your network you will take a full feed of ever expanding
internet routes. On your edge? On a purpose built route server?
Or do you think the only paths forward for everyone's edges is
continuous forklifting and/or selective filtering?
I suspect that people are as much wary of the flexibility made available
to them as they are to the "complexity" imposed via this approach.
Joe
