Hi,
There are multiple ways you can solve that problem. We do the following:
1. Each region has its own ibgp cluster with 2 route reflectors
(usually the P nodes, since they seem to have abundance of CPU power
and not much to do with it).
2. All route reflectors (across regions) are fully meshed.
Hi,
I have seen networks use the control plane of large P routers to
reflect their inet-vpn routes. Keep in mind that when reflecting inet-
vpn routes, the next-hops need to be "reachable". So quite possibly
you will need some policy to resolve the MPLS next-hops.
Internet / VPN / and now
On 11 Sep, 2009, at 09:30, Serge Vautour wrote:
Hello,
We're in the process of planning for an MPLS network that will use
BGP for signaling between PEs. This will be a BGP free Core (i.e. no
BGP on the P routers). What are folks doing for iBGP in this case?
Full Mesh? Full Mesh the Main
Hi there
The RR vs Full Mesh depends on what how you would like to balance your
exit/peering points across the network. If you have, say, 3 border
routers in 3 different regions, you should need at least 3 RRs if you
want each region having it's own preference for the external routes. I
would adv
Hello,
We're in the process of planning for an MPLS network that will use BGP for
signaling between PEs. This will be a BGP free Core (i.e. no BGP on the P
routers). What are folks doing for iBGP in this case? Full Mesh? Full Mesh the
Main POP PEs and Route Reflect to some outlining PEs? Are fo
5 matches
Mail list logo
