[145528] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SP / Enterprise design (dis)similarities
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Tue Oct 11 02:03:59 2011
In-Reply-To: <CABO8Q6QP6O5MbeSzg+dHCX3gzxx4Y0_GJSrUOV-+qyirPbjw9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:02:17 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: Keegan Holley <keegan.holley@sungard.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Keegan Holley
<keegan.holley@sungard.com> wrote:
>
>
> 2011/10/11 Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Keegan Holley
>> <keegan.holley@sungard.com> wrote:
>> > The definition of clean is also subjective. =A0There are many who woul=
d
>> > run
>> > the IGP only for loopbacks and /30's and force everything into BGP eve=
n
>> > at
>> > small scale. =A0BGP makes it easier to control the routing relationshi=
ps
>> > between companies and pretty much removes the need for redistribution.
>> > There are trade-offs though, such as load-balancing.
>>
>> just loadbalance toward the next-hop, no?
>
> It depends on the IGP, whether the paths have exactly the same metric and
> whether or not you need to run MPLS.
sure.
