BGP - weight
Sven Huster
sven at huster.me.uk
Wed Feb 18 11:44:16 UTC 2004
Thanks for anyone who answered.
Guess, we sorted it out now.
Sven
On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 07:31:46PM +0000, E.B. Dreger wrote:
>
...
>
> SH> As this is a small network internally everything is routed
> SH> via static routes.
>
> Except for the smallest of networks, I try to avoid static
> routes. It's additional work and opportunity for error. Using
> BGP + TCP MD5 auth, OSPF auth, hardcoded ARP entries, per-port
> MAC address restrictions, prefix lists, route maps, etc., one can
> run a dynamic network and still keep security under control.
>
>
> SH> R1 and R2 have full BGP views from the transit providers as
> SH> well as partial view from the peers.
>
> Why not arrange the routers and switch in a single VLAN? (Or did
> I misunderstand your earlier ASCII-art diagram?) I usually use
> something like:
>
> 10.0.0.1/32 local sinkhole
> 10.0.0.2/28 virtual router (HSRP/VRRP; maybe XRRP now)
> 10.0.0.3/28 physical router #1
> 10.0.0.4/28 physical router #2
> : : : : : : :
> 10.0.0.13/28 [routing] switch #2
> 10.0.0.14/28 [routing] switch #1
...
More information about the NANOG
mailing list