We have two sites in two different states. Each site will use a different ISP. We own a /20 and have our own AS number. We take advantage BGP failover from the HQ site to the DR site useing local preference and more specific routing. Our DR site uses a /24 carved from our /20. We advertise the /24 and /20 from the DR site, and we break the /20 into two /21's at our HQ site and use local preference.
Currently at my HQ site, I DO NOT take full internet routes from our ISP - only the default route. The DR site takes full Internet routes (currently useing the same ISP). We are in the process of re-provisioning our Internet access to a different provider and I'm trying to decide if I really need to take full routes.
Hi there -- this is the kind of information I need. To be honest though, at this point and time we are not really interestedin NetFlow traffic analysis. If there is no performance affecting reason for accepting full routes - or anything that would prevent us from failing over between the two sites, I don't see any reason to take full routes.
Any other suggestions?
If there is only one way in and out then no you do not need full internet routing and a default route would be fine. The others have pointed out why you might want to take full routing and if your device supports it then why not but if none of the reasons already given are things you need then just accept a default.
As has already been said, accepting full/partial routing for the internet is really to do with when you have multiple exit and entry points and you want to influence either inbound, outbound or both but that is not the case for you.