Re: MSDP vs. MBGP end-point

"Proper MSDP functionality" is somewhat oxymoronic, but originally, there
was an assumption that MSDP peerings would follow MBGP peerings.  However,
many providers found this to be an unnecessary annoyance, so the RPF rules
were modified (and modified) over time with this assumption relaxed, and
hacks like mesh-groups were used to circumvent RPF rules.

So the short answer is: theoretically, it shouldn't matter, but it depends
on your provider's MSDP topology.  But having MSDP follow MBGP is probably
the safest thing to do.


-Lenny

On Mon, 5 Aug 2002, Jay Ford wrote:

-) I received the following response from a prospective multicast peer after
-) providing my MSDP end-point which is not my MBGP end-point.
-)
-) > for proper MSDP functionality, the MSDP peer endpoints should always be the
-) > MBGP peer endpoints. If this is not done, the majority of loop prevention
-) > in MSDP (a flooding protocol) is reduced. (essentially, for proper deployment,
-) > there should be 1 msdp session for every mbgp session, since msdp uses bgp
-) > for topology information, since it has no topology information itself)
-)
-) Comments?
-)
-) ________________________________________________________________________
-) Jay Ford, Network Engineering Group, Information Technology Services
-) University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242
-) email: [email protected], phone: 319-335-5555, fax: 319-335-2951
-)