The classics on BGP are Routing TCP/IP vol 1 and 2 by Doyle and Internet Routing Architectures by Sam Halabi.
If you understand those, you understand enough to have some "BGP kung fu". On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Brandon Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Could you guys recommend some good books or other documentation on some > of these BGP "best practice" methodologies? I am a BGP novice but would > like to get myself more up to speed on BGP kung fu. > I found this current thread somewhat fascinating. > > Thanks > Brandon > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 10:15 AM > To: 'Pete Templin' > Cc: 'cisco-nsp' > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Conditional BGP > > Thanks Pete.... yeah, thought that through as well - been there done > that ;) > We'll offer them a full feed (well, all three options but I know they'll > want a full feed I believe - that's what they get via Cogent as well) > and > then they can control everything - with communities as well on our side. > We > always local-pref customers 300, peers 200, transit 100 and been caught > on > that before hehe... I'm happy if the decisions are on the customer and > we're "just" the provider.... > > Take care, > > Paul > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pete Templin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 1:06 PM > To: Paul Stewart > Cc: 'cisco-nsp' > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Conditional BGP > > Paul Stewart wrote: > >> What is common practice for this scenario? We would still prefer to > just >> send a full table and put the control into their hands but I'm also >> concerned if they will have the technical expertise to accomplish > this.. > On >> their side, what would be common practice? I've been looking at > conditional >> BGP advertisements using route-maps but don't believe that's the best >> solution.. > > They can control their outbound fairly easily. They should make sure > they're getting the same level (default-only, partial, full) of routes > from you as from Cogent - if they take more from you, those routes are > more-specific and would win regardless. I'd suggest they take > default-only from you (or more but filter out everything but default so > they can change on the fly later) and whatever they wish from Cogent. > > Controlling inbound is often tougher. Any smart provider sets a higher > local pref on customer routes than on transit/peer routes (make money > rather than pay money), so if you do this you'll need to make an > exception for them (or offer the exception via communities). Otherwise, > > you'll prefer their announcement no matter how many prepends they do, > and if that happens for a minute, your transits will likely prefer your > propagation no matter how many prepends they do. Even if you don't do > this today, if Cogent goes down, you'll choose the direct link (it's the > > only one live) and your transits will do the same thing (your routes > have customer LP in their network). When Cogent comes up, your transits > > will ignore the Cogent-propagated route since it's only peer LP. They'd > > have to bounce the link to you to restore their preferred balance. > You'll need to find out how to accomplish the same thing in your > providers' networks as well. (Been there, done that, got the t-shirt.) > > pt > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
