North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
RE: redistribute bgp considered harmful
- From: Andrew.McConnell
- Date: Fri Oct 04 18:26:33 2002
Let's not forget about the use of VRF's. BGP is not used exclusively for
sending public routes in our network. Just a thought.
Network Implementation Engineer
SunGard Network Technologies
401 North Broad St
Philadelphia, PA 19108
<cyouse@register. To: 'Sean Donelan' <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
Sent by: Subject: RE: redistribute bgp considered harmful
I've never subscribed to the "Are you sure?" concept, or preventing
by removing functionality, effectively tying an operator's hands behind
his/her back. The fact is that redistributing BGP into an IGP can have its
uses (though not usually, okay, never, when carrying a full table on the
public Internet) and I'd hate to see the messy workarounds that would come
about, when the solution could otherwise be straightforward.
My Windows workstation asks me "Are you sure?" all the time. Just
From: Sean Donelan [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 6:01 PM
Subject: redistribute bgp considered harmful
Should the Service Provider version of routing software include the
redistribute bgp command? Other than CCIE labs, I haven't seen a
real-world use for redistributing the BGP route table into any IGP.
If the command was removed (or included a Are your sure? question) what
would the affect be on ISPs, other than improving reliability by
stopping network engineers from fubaring a backbone?