I also like the RFC2547bis.
I would like to learn more about your painful
experience with IGP in this
context. Please elaborate a little bit more on this
subject -> Dave Israel
wrote "Besides, in at least one major current
implementation, your IGP
options are painfully limited."
Thanks in advance, Alex
From: Dave Israel
[mailto:davei () biohazard demon digex net]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 5:45 PM
To: Elwin Eliazer
Cc: nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: A question on CE to PE route exchanges
On 5/18/2001 at 14:13:53 -0700, Elwin Eliazer said:
RFC2547bis suggests the use of EBGP between
CE and PE routers; Is this a preferable model for
service providers and enterprise customers, when
compared to using IGP?
Yes. BGP is designed for network borders. Besides,
in at least one
major current implementation, your IGP options are
Are there anyone who have deployed this? If so,
how is the EBGP peering setup if the CE router
is with a local (VPN) IP address?
The BGP session lives in VPN space, the routes only
exist in VPN
routing tables. Your CE having a VPN address is
really just the