Hello Otis: I meant to account for his provider prepending their AS, not him prepending his AS. :-) So, if his upstream is NTT, he would get 2914 2914 11274 as well as 2914 11274.
Regards, Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: OCOSA ListAcct [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 3:28 PM > To: Michael K. Smith - Adhost > Cc: Kristian Kielhofner; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Filtering BGP routes with route-map vs. not > getting them in > > 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/
