4 ms·
Do you have loops internally?
by _nalply 9y ago
Do you have loops internally?
- noselasd 9y agoI would think people deploy BGP to automate routing and routing policies, not primarily to avoid loops.
- mrmondo 9y agoIndeed, completely for fast, simple routing (rather than higher level, more complex failover). Slightly off topic, but in my experience most (general) internal networking loops stem from mis configured devices bridging networks (desktop level, network device level or VM / SDN)
- bartvanH 9y agoI may be old, but if you have a network loop inside your own infrastructure wouldn't it be way more sane to handle that on layer 2? for instance with properly configured spanning tree?
- woah 9y agoA routing protocol will avoid loops more efficiently
- jethro_tell 9y agoAlso, it's allows loops to be used as multi paths from different points in the net. Say you have a rack at south and north and there is a loop to a rack in the middle. For failover, you'll take any path that is up. But for normal operation, you'd prefer to take the shortest path.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- lima 9y agoLayer 2 technologies like MC-LAG do that as well (though I agree that it's better to route, if possible)
- scheesman 9y agoRouting is a Layer 3 issue. Loops are a Layer 2 issue. Multiple paths on a Layer 3 network provide redundancy when used with a routing protocol such as BGP. Multiple paths on a Layer 2 network provide redundancy when used with a protocol such as LACP. Without proper design, 2 network segments connected with multiple links will trigger Spanning Tree and shut down one of the links. And depending on the configuration, it may or may not unshut if the active link pair goes down.
- elihu 9y agoSpanning tree just prunes links from the network to eliminate loops. Sometimes the link that got pruned happened to be the fastest path from point A to point B. So, sometimes you can get a more efficient network if you leave those links in, but that requires more sophisticated routing.