Mike, I am not understanding what you are asking here? Explain please....
Prepending would only give Kris a longer as path...making others prefer Kris shorter path over that one. I believe his goal is to get full routes and do what he pleases. But use all 120,000 once he gets a bigger router. I think it's 120,000 maybe more or less. Actually if Kris' upstream did communities with him he could get customers routes and default that way....much cleaner I think.... Otis Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote: > 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/
