From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Fri Jun 27 2008 - 10:32:59 ART
You'll find that the idea in the industry has shifted over time.
In larger RR scaling designs, it used to be viewed that all RRs should be in
the same cluster. If you peer them with each other though, it won't
accomplish much. Reason for this is that the cluster-id is used for loop
detection. So if you see your own, it'll be looped!
So the shift these days is to move into separate cluster IF you are having
your reflectors peered together.
A lot depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Just follow the
"what-if" for updates. IF a client loses a connection to one RR, therefore
the route goes from one RR to the other RR, will the route be needed? If
so, make sure it won't be killed.
HTH,
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, JNCIE-M
#153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.
CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-ER
Senior CCIE Instructor
smorris@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
Knowledge is power.
Power corrupts.
Study hard and be Eeeeviiiil......
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of ccie
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 6:12 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: the relation between the route-reflector servers within the same
bgp cluster id?
Hi experts,
Assume I have 5 router within the same AS, and two of them will have IBGP
peer with the rest, So I configure these two with the same bgp cluster-id,
and configure the rest to be their route-reflector-clients. Should I
configure these two to be route-reflector-clients to each others!!!
Thanks in advance
Amin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 01 2008 - 06:23:23 ART