North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Not so newbie BGP question...

  • From: Danny McPherson
  • Date: Tue Oct 03 01:49:58 2000

> I'm not positive but, is it possible to have 65501 prefer 65502_65503
> (using localpref on the 65501<->65502 transit connection) over 65503
> direct routes learned via the regional exchange?

Yep, and you may even be able to do it yourself if they've implemented the 
RFC1998 stuff.

> In this situation, all concerned have agreed that since 65501 is a common
> transit provider, it is not expected that they pref routes TO customers or
> customers of customers via the regional exchange.
> In a perfect world (someone speak up if you know how to do this!) we could
> do this:
> Have 65501 pref regional exchange routes to 65502 and 65503 for traffic
> originating inside of 65501 or from other 65501 transit customers.

Don't need to do that [typically non-standard thing] if you can do this:

> Have 65501 pref the 65501<->65502 transit connection for traffic
> originating from outside their AS or their transit customers.

Again, the RFC1998 stuff, if supported by AS65501, will enable you [AS65502] 
to do this yourself.

Of course, the above configurations tend to reduce the value of the Regional 
Exchange peering between AS65501 & AS65503, at least when considering the 
AS65503 ingress direction.  They do still provide AS65503 with egress 
flexibility, as well as AS65503-AS65501 [non-transit] interconnectivity in the 
event that the AS65502 path becomes unavailable.