For customer only routes wouldn't this be better to account for prepending?
Ip as-path access-list 5 permit ^(providerAS_)+([0-9_])+$ Regards, Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:cisco-nsp- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of OCOSA ListAcct > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 12:03 PM > To: Kristian Kielhofner > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Filtering BGP routes with route-map vs. not > getting them in > > True if really want to use option b... > > use this string to get routes directly connected to your upstream or > originated. > > ip as-path access-list 5 permit ^upstream as goes here_[0-9]*$ > > or > > > to deny any networks originated form your upstream...and allows > everything else which could be bad if your router does not have at > least > 512MB > > ip as-path access-list 6 deny _upstream as goes here$ > ip as-path access-list 6 permit .* > > > If I remember correctly you can also limited the amount of prefixes a > neighbor can send you... > > router bgp as number > nei x.x.x.x maximum-prefixes and the rest.... > > I think the command is > > > Otis > > Kristian Kielhofner wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > I'm back with another stupid "BGP on a 3750" question. I need > > "customer only routes" to the few providers that I have. From what I > > can tell, I'd end up with far less than the 8,000 max routes this > > platform can handle. I have two options when configuring this: > > > > a) When bringing up the BGP session, I can request aggregated > > customer-only routes (what I want). > > > > or... > > > > b) I can request a full table and filter them myself with route-map > > statements (I think). > > > > With "a" I will have a much simpler configuration (not that it > > matters much). Will the 3750 have problems even receiving these > > routes, even if I am filtering them? I can imagine all sorts of > > potential nastiness with that configuration. > > > > If not, I'd much rather go with option "b". I would have more > > control over my routing and it would be easier to upgrade to a more > > capable router in the future (less co-ordination with ISPs, just > > remove route-map statements). I like this idea more. Can the 3750 > do > > it? What would happen? > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
