[37643] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: A question on CE to PE route exchanges ...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Israel)
Fri May 18 17:57:30 2001
From: Dave Israel <davei@biohazard.demon.digex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <15109.38878.929486.764439@biohazard.demon.digex.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:45:02 -0400
To: Elwin Eliazer <elwinietf@yahoo.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: A question on CE to PE route exchanges ... (Elwin Eliazer)
Reply-To: davei@biohazard.demon.digex.net
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 5/18/2001 at 14:13:53 -0700, Elwin Eliazer said:
>
> Hi,
>
> RFC2547bis suggests the use of EBGP between
> CE and PE routers; Is this a preferable model for
> service providers and enterprise customers, when
> compared to using IGP?
Yes. BGP is designed for network borders. Besides, in at least one
major current implementation, your IGP options are painfully limited.
> Are there anyone who have deployed this? If so,
> how is the EBGP peering setup if the CE router
> is with a local (VPN) IP address?
The BGP session lives in VPN space, the routes only exist in VPN
routing tables. Your CE having a VPN address is really just the
natural solution.
-Dave
