Re: [GROW] RR reflection to clients

[Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow at gmail.com>]

On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Gargi Nalawade <nalawade at redback.com> wrote:

> In the case you describe where the RR advertises the client routes back to the clients,
> all the prefixes - P1, P2, P3, P12, P23 & P31 would be advertised in 1 packet which

 'could be advertised in one packet' (if there aren't other things
associated with the routes which make it not packable in a single bgp
packet which may span more than 1 IP packet).

> gets replicated to all 3 clients (assuming all 3 are in a peer-group and the rest of the
> attributes are same).
>
> Now if we change it so that the RR does not advertise the client's own routes back to it,
> the RR would end up formatting & sending - in the best case, 3 BGP updates instead of 1.
>
> My point is - no matter what efficiencies we build into an implementation - mandating
> that the RR not advertise client routes back to clients, would increase the #BGP updates
> processed by the RR and all the "n" RR-clients as well as on the wire by n-fold in the worst
> case.

only the RR is affected in this case, it makes 'more than one' packet,
one for each client... right?

-Chris