[24427] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Route-Reflector Redundancy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Carter)
Tue Jun 29 11:46:43 1999
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 08:44:12 -0700
From: Steve Carter <scarter@pobox.com>
To: Brandon Applegate <brandon@one.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Mail-Followup-To: Brandon Applegate <brandon@one.net>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9906291001090.16576-100000@chrome.burn.net>; from Brandon Applegate on Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 10:06:18AM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Brandon Applegate wrote:
> In a redundant RR design, I have several questions that don't seem to be
> clearly covered in RFC1966.
>
> 1) Does a given route-reflector have to peer with the other
> route-reflectors in its own cluster ??
Yes. All route-reflector servers within your network should be fully
meshed.
> 2) If yes to 1), do the RRs in the cluster peer with each other as
> clients or non-clients ??
All route-reflector servers peer as non-clients.
> Above and beyond all of the above (actually depending on all of the above
> :) ), if my client router hears something from RR1, will it also hear it
> from RR2 ?? Is there a race condition ?
Read BGP 101. A client router is just like any other BGP router, the
protocol allows for a BGP router to hear multiple announcements for the
same destination. The router will choose the best destination based on
the usual BGP decision rules.
-Steve
