[180302] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGP Multihoming 2 providers full or partial?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Sun May 31 10:13:55 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Maqbool Hashim <maqbool@madbull.info>,
Joseph Jackson <jjackson@aninetworks.net>, "nanog@nanog.org"
<nanog@nanog.org>
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 16:13:36 +0200
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR02MB0732601AFE28BF81BE82EC20D6B70@HE1PR02MB0732.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 31/May/15 14:09, Maqbool Hashim wrote:
>
> I am just not sure of exactly how to define the "partial" routing table criteria to our two providers. Should we just take routes for each provider and their peers and a default from both?
Since you can't take a full feed from either upstream, partial routes
will mean taking your upstream's own routes + their directly-connected
customers + default.
You may make it more flexible by asking for their peering routes also,
but if these are large global transit providers, that could be the full
BGP table anyway (or 90% of it).
Mark.
