topic IBGP between route reflector server in Routing and SD-WAN

IBGP between route reflector server

mythology — Mon, 04 Mar 2019 22:51:06 GMT

Hi Guys,

Is it necessary to have iBGP session between 2 RR server (in the same cluster). What are the pro's and con's?

Regards,

IBGP between route reflector server

lgijssel — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:22:03 GMT

Yes, you need it.

Pro's and cons do not apply, its a requirement.

regards,

Leo

IBGP between route reflector server

mythology — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:39:33 GMT

Can i know the reason for having iBGP peering between RR servers?. If i think about it, RR will not have any routes to originate, its just there to reflect routes from clients and all my clients peer with both the RR server. Since all my clients peer with both RR, there is no point in one RR receiving routes from other RR (sent by clients).

Online documentation says its required but dosent mention on why it is required.

IBGP between route reflector server

lgijssel — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 19:23:56 GMT

Perhaps that's because it is so obvious.

The whole RR concept was developed to alleviate the primary requirement of all iBGP peers.

This requirement being... yes(!) a full mesh of BGP peers defined between them.

By using an RR, only the RR servers must still meet this requirement. Thats basically all there is to it.

Check this: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a00800c95bb.shtml

regards,

Leo

IBGP between route reflector server

mythology — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:33:40 GMT

Yes Leo, you are right. Ideally RR should have full-mesh peering with non-client iBGP peers.

In my network we have 2 RR and all the POP peer with both the RR. As of now i am not facing any issue. If anyone has faced any issue with this setup, let me know.