Subject: RE: A few comments on Site-Local Useage

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 18:41:59 -0800

> Mark Smith wrote:
> Could it be argued that if there was a need for confederations
> in BGP to handle iBGP scaling, then there would a reason for
> site-locals to be carried by BGP, presuming a single instance
> of site-local addressing across the organisation ?

I don't think so. Although it is true that large organizations will be
concerned by the scalability of their IGP and more specifically by
convergence speed, the path to this is internal aggregation. Site-locals
can be aggregated internally like any other address.

Michel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Mark Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: 11 Nov 2002 14:41:18 +1100

I have no experience with BGP confederations, so I could easily be
wrong, however I was under the impression that the idea that BGP
confederations was to reduce the number of iBGP sessions (ie avoid the
full mesh iBGP problem), not so much address aggregation itself.

If this is the case, I think there is a need for BGP, or at least the
pseudo EBGP connections between the pseudo ASs in your confederation, to
carry site-local addressing.

Mark.