RE: IBGP Vs. EBGP

The device seems to want to know the perspective of your network internally,
and not externally which makes sense.

I see your issue. You are worried dumping the full bgp tables internally to
ibgp will use up to much memory and cpu?

Why not make a zebra route server on linux just for this purpose?

http://www.zebra.org/

this way a commodity workstation can be the ibgp router. Can you external ISP
facing routers handle the "full table" (like 350-400k routes)

-Joe

From: Mohamed Osama [mailto:tetoo_me_at_hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 11:25 AM
To: Joseph L. Brunner; Cisco certification
Subject: RE: IBGP Vs. EBGP

Dear Joe,

can you clarify more what you mean by (needing next hop reserved for this
service)?
i can understand that by using IBGP next hop in our network will not be
changed but if it's about that we can make a route map outbound to their
direction to set it with next hop value they need?

About route reflector client ... my problem here is that i have a small device
for IGW using Default Route outside my AS,by changing it from that to a Route
Reflector carrying Full internet Table would sure Affect my Process Cpu on
that IGW.

clarify more your points and i appreciate ur help.

> From: joe_at_affirmedsystems.com
> To: tetoo_me_at_hotmail.com; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: IBGP Vs. EBGP
> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 14:43:40 +0000
>
> They probably want next hop preserved for this type of device so they can
get that from ibgp. Ebgp of course does full tables and communities can be
sent no problem.
>
> You got to remember, the smartest engineers don't work at these vendors in
the "customer facing role" and they probably have their script they learned in
2 weeks of training - you are messing with them when you ask for deviations of
that script!
>
> Don't worry too much about introducing a route reflector client in your
network - simply make them use the community "no advertise" upon receipt if
possible so they can't do anything with the routes.
>
> -Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Mohamed Osama
> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 8:52 AM
> To: Cisco certification
> Subject: IBGP Vs. EBGP
>
> Dear All,
> I Hope if someone can advice me about this Issue,
> In our AS there is a New test device thats works as J-Flow (some sort of
Netflow caching) is being insterted into out Network,
> They Want to Peering with our Internet Gateway Router as IBGP,
> however our Rules is to not Config any IBGP peering with a box that is not
fully controlled and managed by our side.
> We said that we want to config peering as EBGP,however they claim that EBGP
peering didn't give them required information as Full internet Routing Table
and Full Community Issues and they Want it IBGP.
> Anyone can advice me about this Issue,if i can Config It as EBGP but find a
way to let Test Box feel like IBGP.
> Or Develop a Policy for IBGP Peering,however that will make me to config IGW
as Route Reflector and Will Impact Our Process from Changing it as Router
Contains only a Default Route to a RR peer IBGP with Test Box.
> Thanks,Osama
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Fri Jun 03 2011 - 15:46:01 ART