From: Schulz, Dave (DSchulz@dpsciences.com)
Date: Thu Sep 22 2005 - 11:33:50 GMT-3
I would assume that this is the Stock Exchange, that fast convergence may be
the best selling point to look at. Speed/time is money in the stock world.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com
To: 'Group Study'
Sent: 9/22/2005 5:48 AM
Subject: ibgp w/o IGP - How bad?
Hi guys,
My client, a very well known Stock Exchange, is planning to re-engineer
his
network.
The new network design calls for using iBGP between 4 fully meshed
peers,
without any IGP.
Being a Stock Exchange, extreme reliability is paramount.
So far, I haven't been able to convince this client that this plan is
not a
good idea.
I've given this client several reasons why this is not a good idea but
to no
avail.
Maybe I'm missing the most important and compelling reasons not to do
this.
I've told him that iBGP wasn't designed to be used in place of an IGP
because BGP's loop avoidance mechanism is based on the list of AS's
within
the path attribute; within an iBGP mesh, there's no loop avoidance
mechanism.
I also told him that should any neighbor peering go down that
re-establishing that peering will be very slow (relative to IGP's).
IMHO, there are other very poor design choices, for example, a whole
bunch
of static routes are being redist into bgp on one side of the iBGP
"cloud"
and then being redist into RIP on the other side.
Besides the reasons I've already stated, are there any other MORE
important
reasons this is a poor network design?
This design was tested and it does work but I'm concerned that any
problem -
no matter how small - will cause the whole network to crash.
What do you guys think?
Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 02 2005 - 14:40:16 GMT-3