On (2013-01-22 17:50 +0100), Gert Doering wrote: > I'm still not convinced that this is more elegant than "the to-upstream > edge routers just inject a static default route (pointing to the upstream > peer) into IGP". What's the benefit of the extra recursion?
If you point it at peer IP, it'll be valid route, as long as peer interface is UP. This does not mean it's usable egress. If at edge you point it to some 8.8.8.8 without interface and send next-hop-self, it'll advertise it, even if local edge is down as it'll recurse to any available edge presuming edge has full table. If you do route to 8.8.8.8 with explicit WAN interface it's mostly the same, but I think some platforms I've tried stop recursing when interface is given. And if it works in your platform and you can choose option with same results, where one gives you default free BGP and one does not, for me, choice is easy. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
