[55490] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: routing between provider edge and CPE routers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Bernico)
Wed Jan 29 16:07:05 2003
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:04:43 -0600
From: "Mike Bernico" <mbernico@illinois.net>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Thanks so much for all the feedback. All your input has been extremely
helpful. =20
Just to clarify:
In our network core all customer routes are summarized and carried in
iBGP. That was a recent change of mine. We use EIGRP to carry loopback
and next hop information. I'm working on migrating us to IS-IS
currently. (Hmm...that last sentence probably just opened up another
can of worms...) At the network edge we use heavily filtered EIGRP. =20
I was already leaning towards static routes, based on this groups input
I would say that it will be a new priority.
Thanks again
Mike=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Robertson [mailto:bruce@greatbasin.net]=20
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:09 AM
To: Mike Bernico
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: routing between provider edge and CPE routers=20
We switched to BGP just recently, before things got out of hand. I
highly
recommend that you do so. It really does work better. It's very nice
seeing
your OSPF config carry essentially just the loopback interfaces.
> In particular I'm wondering about the thousands of lines of
> configuration used to make static routes work.
You don't say whether you're using Cisco, but recent IOSes have no
trouble
with huge configurations. You may have to use 'service
compress-config'.
--
Bruce Robertson, President/CEO
+1-775-348-7299
Great Basin Internet Services, Inc. fax:
+1-775-348-9412
http://www.greatbasin.net
