Good morning, thanks for the clarification, I think I begin to get it. - Using eBGP for getting/peering externally - Using OSPF to distribute internal routes as well as routes to the upstreams - Using iBGP to distribute the external routes with unmodified next hop ("direct; gateway recursive;") Does that sound/look sane to you? Best, Nico p.s.: I have to say I find the "next hop self" / iBGP approach a bit confusing, as it hides the original route and makes it hard to debug issues. Ondrej Zajicek <santiago@crfreenet.org> writes:
On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 01:22:53PM +0100, Nico Schottelius wrote:
Good morning,
we have setup OSPF internally to redistribute all of our routes and it seems that we lose the as path on the way:
Hello
You do not want export BGP routes to OSPF, or even export them back to BGP. That is unreasonable setup with today BGP table sizes, and intristic limitations like inability to transfer BGP attributes (as you noticed).
The standard setup is to use OSPF for internal routes and IBGP for external ones. Or just IBGP with direct / next hop self, if topology is simple enough.
-- Modern, affordable, Swiss Virtual Machines. Visit www.datacenterlight.ch