Dual Homed BGP

Fri Jan 24 22:32:27 UTC 2020

Full tables will not make much noticeable difference if you are not
peering. However you want to make sure both links get used. It can be a
90%/10% split but 100%/0% is bad because then you may discover that the
alternate path is actually broken the moment the primary fail. If you
choose only default then you need to think about that.

If you join any peering exchanges, full tables will be mandatory. Some
parties will export prefixes and then expect a more specific prefix
received from your transit to override a part of the space received via the
peering.

Regards

Baldur

fre. 24. jan. 2020 17.41 skrev Brian <brian.bsi at gmail.com>:

> Hello all. I am having a hard time trying to articulate why a Dual Home
> ISP should have full tables. My understanding has always been that full
> tables when dual homed allow much more control. Especially in helping to
> prevent Async routes.
>
>
> Am I crazy?
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20200124/07ddfb1c/attachment.html>