Hi,
but please take into consideration that your iBGP Sessions will flap once you
configure the first rr session on a box if you use vpn families:
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/bgp/topics/topic-map/bgp-session-flaps.html
btw:
We run 14 routers (MX204-960, peak was 25 devices) with a full table each in a
full meshed setup (IS-IS/RSVP/MPLS, no SR).
Works fine since many years and I remember no issue that a rr would have
avoided.
On the other side we already had issues (long time ago in an other setup with
quagga rr and Catalyst 6500 + x86 routers) with a rr setup in which router A
was not able to reach router B but both reached the RR.
So I do not think that a full mesh is a no-go for small setups.
kind regards
Rolf
On 05/12/2025 23:20, Aaron1 via juniper-nsp wrote:
Migrating to an RR design later would seem to add RR, full mesh to it, then one
by one start moving routers to RR-client connections, til complete
Aaron
On Dec 5, 2025, at 4:07 PM, Johan Borch via juniper-nsp
<[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks, this is a quite small network at the moment. Three edge routers
(with full tables) and a bunch (9) PE routers (these will be able to handle
full table). I guess my only option right now is to run RR on my three edge
routers, not sure if that is a good idea.
A bunch of virtual RRs sound like a good solution. But we can't add more
cost at the moment, is it hard to migrate towards a RR design at a later
stage?
Johan
On Fri, Dec 5, 2025 at 3:39 PM Saku Ytti <[email protected]> wrote:
I would generally recommend RR on anything more than 2 router setup.
RR gives redundancy on the signalling path, one iBGP flap doesn't
cause an outage.
With ORR and ADDPATH you're not really losing anything.
On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 at 14:36, Johan Borch via juniper-nsp
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi!
In an SR/MP-BGP underlay, will it have a significant impact on device
performance if we use a full iBGP mesh instead of route reflectors or
other
drawbacks? Let’s say we will end up with around 100 PE routers. These
routers will not carry an excessive number of prefixes (no full tables).
We can ignore the configuration part as configuration is auto-generated.
Br
Johan
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
