<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 29/Sep/15 16:59, Frank Kuse wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:DUB119-W1152312BFF9205D37A7E19A14E0@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div>
<div> <br>
Each link is a minimum of STM16.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I'm assuming that you have a discrete eBGP session per STM-16 link.<br>
<br>
If so, why don't you reduce the number eBGP sessions so that instead
of 8x, you have 4x? You can do this in one of two ways:<br>
<br>
a) Run a POS LAG with your provides to whom you have multiple
links. Assuming both your router and theirs can support this, you
end up with a single logical <br>
link that is equal to the sum of each individual STM-16
combined. This way, routing becomes easier and you end up with a
larger link that will support ECMP.<br>
<br>
b) The other option is to run eBGP Multi-Hop, running the BGP
session across a Loopback interface on either side, and using static
routing on both sides so that <br>
you load balance traffic across all links to/from the same
upstream. Again, this has the benefit of having a single eBGP
session for all links to the same <br>
upstream, while providing ECMP.<br>
<br>
With the increased capacity and the halving of all your eBGP
sessions, you can have an easier time doing traffic engineering
using classic methods such as AS_PATH prepending, safely
de-aggregating and/or discriminate announcing of prefixes amongst
the providers.<br>
<br>
Hope this helps.<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
</body>
</html>