|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: BGP Confederations
Hi ccie10, Have you considered reflectors ? The configuration is trival and migration easy. Is your reason for confederations partitioning based on the need to run multiple IGP instances in your network ? If so what IGP are you running today (having full mesh of ibgp) and how big is the network we are talking about here ? I am asking as I wonder why scaling ibgp mesh with reflectors was not chosen as the prefered option. R. > It's not a fun process. I've given the matter quite a lot of thought. > There are no easy ways to do this. Of course, with sufficient planning, > some scripts, a good lab environment, and a few hours of downtime, a > network can be transitioned. I don't recommend it for faint of heart. The > best candidates for a BGP Confederation design are isolated eBGP networks > (i.e. networks where AS border routers run eBGP, with no iBGP mesh) and > greenfield networks. The last network I worked with that made a successful > transition was Mindspring, AS4355, and they fell into the former category. > > The big question is, how big is the network. It's a trivial transition > with 10 routers, lets say. If you have 100 fully meshed iBGP peers, I > wouldn't bet on it. Also, implement communities - they make certain > aspects of confederation configuration much easier. > > For more information on confeds, check on the NANOG web site. There are > several archived presentations on the subject. > > - Dan Golding > > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, ccie10 wrote: > > > > > Is there an easy way to migrate an existing network running IBGP full mesh > > to a > > Condederation based configration. Any documentation that I have come across > > states that current BGP configs need to be redone and all peering > > relationships must torn down and rebuilt. Any addtional info/links regarding > > confederations would be appreciated > > > > thanks
|