We are going to convert to BGP, However there are few things I am not sure which road I should go down at the moment, it would be grateful if anyone here could give me some suggestions.
We have two ASR routers connecting to Transit provider via EBGP sessions and receiving full Internet routing table.
1. EIGRP will be runn on all routers within the AS to provide detailed routing, currently there about 500 internal routing entry within the AS
2. iBGP sessions between ASR1-ASR2 will be propagating full internet routing table that each ASRs take from transit provider
3. iBGP between ASR1 to 6500-1 will be
ASR1 sends default route to 6500-1 with Local preference 130
6500-1 doesn't announce anything to ASR1, as the internal routing will be carried by EIGRP
4. iBGP between ASR2 to 6500-2 will be
ASR2 sends default route to 6500-2 with Local preference 130
6500-2 doesn't announce anything to ASR2, as the internal routing will be carried by EIGRP
5. iBGP sessions between 6500-1 and 6500-2
6500-1 announce default route to 6500-2 with Local preference 90
6500-2 announce default route to 6500-1 with Local preference 90
6. hot standby protocol running between 6500-1 and 6500-2 with 6500-1 acting as active router for most of the subnet
1. would this design work?
as from I've read at the moment, that the iBGP needs to be fully meshed, however I can't see there is any reasons I need to establish an iBGP sessions between ASR1 and 6500-2 or ASR2 and 6500-1.
And also is it a good idea to use the EIGRP to progate the internal routing as there would be lots of changes, will this make the network unstable in the future?
2. for future expansion purpose, for instance if we add another physical site with a pair of 6500 and connecting to the ASR router core in the same manner,
should I use route reflector and make 6500-1 as the ASR1 client and 6500-2 as ASR2 client?
Any response will be really appreciated. Thank you all.