On (2012-10-18 12:21 +0200), Benny Amorsen wrote: > Do you need filters/policies/route-maps in a VRF? If a customer messes > up, they only take out their own VRF. OSPF in a VRF can be pretty much > hands-off. You do not even need to configure neighbors. The only problem > is if your customer sends you a million routes.
It shouldn't be argued this direction, BGP needs no justification, IGP does. But yes, I allow customer to use communities to various kind of functions, including BGP blackholing. And I'm planning to implement aggregation in IPv6 on PE level, but for redundant customers etc, I will need to break aggregation, which I will do via BGP communities and static tags. > It would be great if someone came up with a zero-configuration solution > for BGP. I have seriously considered switching our default PE-CE routing > protocol to eBGP, but it ends up quite complicated. We did this decade ago, no one has looked back. Configuring BGP in certain platforms can be 0 touch on PE. Like if you use 'allow CIDR' in JunOS or 'bgp listen range CDIR peer-group X' in JunOS you don't even need to touch PE when adding CE. In JunOS you can further reduce config cruft by using apply-group to fill in all stuff like import/export maps, asn, as-override etc, so those would only appear in single place. > OSPF may be expensive in theory, but in practice it performs well. RIP is the real scale beast :) If you truly need to run thousands of sessions. I know someone doing RIP to the server at TOR, where RIP was only scalable solution. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
