25 Apr
2014
25 Apr
'14
2:51 a.m.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Eric Fort <eric.fort(a)gmail.com> wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
Why would you add the complexity of BGP over GRE?
It allows flexible routing... but I still stand by BGP being overkill for
44net and adds additional hassles of AS numbers to manage and keep track of
along with hard limits of AS numbers unless you start doing 4-byte ASN's...
which increases more information to keep track of and manage. We're having
enough issues keeping DNS managed in a global sense as it is...
I guess you could if you
wanted to but the 2 protocols have extremely different uses. Use BGP to
connect with one or more network service providers where you then bring
your own address space. Use GRE to build tunnels into those networks.
once BGP peered to the internet cloud, let the cloud do the routing and
delivery between networks for you.
I think John means this would be a private BGP and AS and not something
requiring something from IANA/RIR's. You would still need a tunnel back to
a master hub to get GRE tunnel information via NHRP as that information
isn't obtain by BGP magic.
Obviously if you have a direct point to
point route between these networks (over radio) that may be preferable, but
then again if you have such a link then maybe it's a good idea for those
networks to peer based upon a common agreed upon roting policy.
With most any routing protocol... BGP for instance it would advertise that
your network is available via AS numbers. But most routing protocols do
exactly the same thing. BGP just adds alot of extra options like a luxury
car so that you can tune your traffic as you'd like (for instance you can
advertise that you want most of your ingress traffic to come over RF unless
the link is over 80% utilization in which case you can have them come over
another network connection.