[126597] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Mikrotik BGP Question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Florian Weimer)
Mon May 24 05:35:02 2010
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: "George Bonser" <gbonser@seven.com>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 11:34:40 +0200
In-Reply-To: <5A6D953473350C4B9995546AFE9939EE09EA465C@RWC-EX1.corp.seven.com>
(George Bonser's message of "Sun, 23 May 2010 22:48:01 -0700")
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
* George Bonser:
> Well, I believe the original poster said that one of his colleagues
> swore that BGP multihoming wouldn't work unless both feeds terminated on
> the same router. I suppose said colleague has never heard of iBGP
> between two routers of the local AS. Those two routers should probably
> take a full table and exchange them between the two but going inside the
> network, yeah, they should probably simply originate a default into the
> the ospf routing.
Does this really work that well? Won't you still get loops or
blackholes unless the eBGP routes on all border routers are identical?
I think you also need iBGP speakers along all feasible paths between
eBGP speakers.
