Subject: [Idr] Comments on draft-chen-bgp-redist-00.txt

From: Alex Zinin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 17:12:51 +0900

Comments I brought up today:

 1. The problem appears because there are two points within the router where
    two routes are compared. The draft suggests that the BGP path selection
    process is made consistent with the selection process in the routing
    table (AdminDist-based).

    The question is whether the problem statement is applicable for the
    implementations where BGP path selection and AD comparison happens
    at the same time (from what I remember, gated did that). In other words,
    the question is whether the problem is implementations specific or not,
    and hence whether a change to the protocol is appropriate.

 2. Suggestion: seems that the problem can be solved without changing the
    best path selection process.

    The idea is to establish a 1:1 mapping between LOCAL_RPEF and AD, i.e. take
    the AD value and use it as LOCAL_PREF value when importing (redistributing)
    routes to BGP, and use the LOCAL_PREF value as the AD when installing routes
    in the routing table. The advantage is it automagically makes the route
    selection decisions consistent not only within a single router, but
    throughout the iBGP mesh too.

    Food for thoughts...
    
-- 
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin/

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 11:18:31 -0500

>     throughout the iBGP mesh too.

Sounds like this could go in a follow up internet-draft.  It is
outside of BGP itself.

Curtis

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 11:18:31 -0500

Curtis