[194531] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Question about experiences with BGP remote-AS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Radu-Adrian Feurdean)
Fri May 5 15:29:30 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Radu-Adrian Feurdean" <nanog@radu-adrian.feurdean.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 21:29:26 +0200
In-Reply-To: <SN1PR06MB2288BABC2189F6DCC28E77CDABEB0@SN1PR06MB2288.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Fri, May 5, 2017, at 18:55, LF OD wrote:
> of our existing ASNs and peerings. As it turns out, there are many
> routers that can do VRFs but you cannot put a unique ASN on each VRF so
> replicating the old environment isn't quite that straightforward. The BGP
> remote-as looks to be a possible alternative solution, but we've never
You mean *local-as*, right ?
Otherwise, there was a vendor that allowed different ASN per VRF but
only with non-MPLS vrfs, and that product line is both end-of-sale and
major overkill for your set-up.
