[155824] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Bird vs Quagga revisited
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Thomas Mangin)
Fri Aug 24 02:44:56 2012
In-Reply-To: <B191463A-2617-46BB-8E1C-513B38898652@nosignal.org>
From: Thomas Mangin <thomas.mangin@exa-networks.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 07:44:02 +0100
To: Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Fell free to contact me if you have any questions about ExaBGP as I am painf=
ully aware it's documentation is nowhere near what it should be.
Thomas
Sent from my iPad
On 23 Aug 2012, at 08:52, Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org> wrote:
>=20
> On 22 Aug 2012, at 18:42, David Hubbard <dhubbard@dino.hostasaurus.com> wr=
ote:
>=20
>> Of those who have used Quagga or Bird, or anything else,
>> would either of them be appropriate and/or well suited for
>> use as an iBGP blackhole route server?
>=20
> You can use Quagga or Bird as a blackhole BGP injector, because the forwar=
ding load is next to nothing and the number of prefixes in your blackhole RI=
B is likely to be small.
>=20
> You might - if you programatically get the blackhole criteria from your cr=
m or some other database find ExaBGP to be easier to integrate with your dat=
a source. ExaBGP is a very lightweight BGP speaker that is perfectly suited=
for this purpose - http://code.google.com/p/exabgp/
>=20
> Andy
