|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <p0500190db67fd0293707@[63.216.127.98]> In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20010108110646.01b104b0@nemo.corp.equinix.com> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 15:17:40 -0500 To: nanog@merit.edu From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@clark.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu I like to think of a route server, when used for actual routing exchange rather than statistics collection alone, as a means of scaling eBGP by reducing the number of peers. That complements a route reflector, which is a means of scaling iBGP. Bay RS, at one point, made a distinction between a route reflector and a route reflector server, both for iBGP scalability. I'd have to do some digging to find out if the latter was more than a marketing distinction. >One difference is that Route Servers, like the ones run by Merit >RSNG team, are based on the Internet Routing Registry, whereas route >reflectors are not. Route Server routes are re-announced based upon >configured IRR policy. > >I also think of Route Reflectors as being both internal AS (IGP) and >external AS (BGP) re-announcers whereas Route Servers are strictly >inter-AS (BGP). > >Bill > >>I've also heard some symantic confusion between route-servers and route >>reflectors. In conversation, I usually assume that distinction to be >>between functionally equivalent boxes operating in the plenum between a >>number of administrative domains (a route-server) or as glue between >>regions or ASes within one administrative domain (a route reflector). >>I don't know how common that understanding would be, though. Anyone have >>any better thoughts on the difference between a route-server and a route >>reflector?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |