I'm using as well deafult route though receiving full table from upstreams. This generally to forward the traffic that it might not listed on BGP tables. As once upon a time, one of the client sending huge volume of traffic to this "unlisted" destination.
What i'm thinking is, bogon + bgp table + private ip = whole ipv4 ? :: a. rahman isnaini r. sutan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Seth Mattinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Cisco-nsp'" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 2:52 AM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Default route pointed to an interface : Justin Shore wrote: : > This has been talked about before on this list but I'd like to bring it : > up again for my particular situation. : > : > I have a pair of border routers, 1 with 2 upstream connection and the : > other with a single connection. I'm pulling down full tables from each : > provider and have iBGP between the border routers and the core routers. : > Each border router has a static default pointed to the outgoing : > interface for the local upstream connections (2 on one router and 1 on : > the other). As expected the router with 2 default routes flops back and : > forth between the 2 interfaces every second or two. : > : : If you have a full mesh and full tables from your upstreams, what do you : need default routes for? I only ask because I have a similar setup and I : have no need for a default route in anything that speaks BGP. : : ~Seth : _______________________________________________ : cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] : https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp : archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ : : : -- : No virus found in this incoming message. : Checked by AVG Free Edition. : Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.11.19/956 - Release Date: 8/16/2007 9:48 AM : : _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
