The size of the network does have a role when choose between RR and Confeds. The BGP desgin for a POP is quite different than for the backbone, this is true no matter the size of the ISP. POPs are better place for RR where the backbone is better off with something else. If it is a purely dialup POP, you do not even need BGP within the POP, only the routers connecting to the regional or main backbone need to advertise your routes. A typical design could be having RR and IGP non-backbone area in each POP, making every POP in a Confeds and runing IGP backbone area across the whole BGP backbone network.
Just my .02 Kent Yu ""Gregg Malcolm"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Good question. I don't claim to be an expert on BGP and will not comment on > the advantages and disadvantages of RR/Confeds in large/small environments. > I've only config'ed BGP once in a prod net. Seems to me tho that there is > an important distinction between the two as they might pertain to the lab > test. Both allow the use of weight and local preference (IBGP). Confeds > allow the use of MED since the connections between the confeds is EBGP. You > could also config multiple RR's (clusters) to allow the use of the MED > between the clusters but to me, confeds are easier. I'm sure that there > are other reasons to use one or the other as they relate to the lab, but I > haven't run into it yet. > > Maybe I'm wrong, but this is my take on RR's/confeds. Would love to hear > comments to enlighten me. > > ""Kane, Christopher A."" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I'm currently tearing apart BGP as part of my IE studies. It's not too bad > > since I come from a Network Service Provider background. But, I have run > > into a conflict in regards to RRs vs. Confeds. I probably don't need to > > straighten this out for the Written but when it comes to the lab I'd like > to > > know which route to go down. I have no idea how the lab poses it's > topology > > but if given the requirement to configure a simulated "large" network and > > then having to choose whether to implement RRs or Confeds I wonder which > one > > Cisco prefers. I'm assuming that as part of the lab, the idea is to create > > solutions that work and in doing so, solutions that are as simple as > > possible and as short as possible. > > > > I'd like to hear comments about the pros and cons of each option in > regards > > to how Cisco might prefer to see implementation. Meanwhile, I'm going to > > review all available case studies on CCO. > > > > Thanks, > > Chris Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29993&t=29968 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
