On 22/Jun/20 16:30, adamv0025@netconsultings.com wrote:
> Not quite,
> The routing information is flooded by default, but the receivers will cherry
> pick what they need and drop the rest.
> And even if the default flooding of all and dropping most is a concern -it
> can be addressed where only the relevant subset of all the routing info is
> sent to each receiver.
> The key takeaway however is that no single entity in SP network, be it PE,
> or RR, or ASBR...., ever needs everything, you can always slice and dice
> indefinitely.
> So to sum it up you simply can not run into any scaling ceiling with MP-BGP
> architecture.
The only nodes in our network that have ALL the NLRI is our RR's.
Depending on the function of the egress/ingress router, the RR sends it
only what it needs for its function.
This is how we get away using communities in lieu of VRF's :-).
And as Adam points out, those RR's will swallow anything and everything,
and still remain asleep.
Mark.
> Not quite,
> The routing information is flooded by default, but the receivers will cherry
> pick what they need and drop the rest.
> And even if the default flooding of all and dropping most is a concern -it
> can be addressed where only the relevant subset of all the routing info is
> sent to each receiver.
> The key takeaway however is that no single entity in SP network, be it PE,
> or RR, or ASBR...., ever needs everything, you can always slice and dice
> indefinitely.
> So to sum it up you simply can not run into any scaling ceiling with MP-BGP
> architecture.
The only nodes in our network that have ALL the NLRI is our RR's.
Depending on the function of the egress/ingress router, the RR sends it
only what it needs for its function.
This is how we get away using communities in lieu of VRF's :-).
And as Adam points out, those RR's will swallow anything and everything,
and still remain asleep.
Mark.