From: Arun Arumuganainar (aarumuga@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Jul 19 2005 - 13:43:15 GMT-3
Yeah this is true . I agree with you .
If you are sure BGP routes will be smaller in number , we can resort to BGP
to IGP redistribution . Having doing so we should ensure proper
routefiltering policies to check undesirable routes being injected in to
your network .
What I said is applicable for ISPs and in their CORE NETWORK .
Thanks and Regards
Arun
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Ventre" <messageboard@ventrefamily.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: BGP synchronization
> I'm assuming you say this beause a full internet feed is around 160,000
> routes and I would agree with you here. Pushing this back into OSPF
> might not be optimal. But, I would like to remind you that there are
> plenty of places that run BGP for reasons other than an internet feed.
> Peering with other agencies, business partners, or any other external
> entity where the table sizes are much more managable and this
> redistribution is necessary.
>
> James
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Arun Arumuganainar wrote:
>
> >In real world , if you redistribute BGP routes in to IGP then you are
asking
> >for trouble . You can easily bring down your network by doing this .
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Sep 04 2005 - 17:00:30 GMT-3