\chapter{Layer 3} \section{Routed Network} \section{OSPF} \section{IS-IS} \section{EIGRP} \section{RIP} rip is the old routing protocol still existing using nukber-of-hops as the metric to calculate which route to take to the intended destination. This approach can work fine but has a nukber of weaknesses. 1. Scales like shit. 2. Does not take into account if 2 different paths with the same amount of hops has different transfer capacity. 3. Has no concept of load sharing traffic between links if the same amount of hops is present amongst the best paths available. 4. Limited to a miximum of 16 hops between source and destination. \subsection{RIPng} The version of rip supporting ipv6. different to the standard rip in the ng version is using different multicast addresses to communicate on. \section{Static} \newpage \section{BGP} \wikicommons{BGP_FSM} The protocol of the internet used since 1994.\cite{wiki:Border_Gateway_Protocol} Currently based upon \rfc{4271} with updates following in \rfc{6286} \rfc{6608}, \rfc{6793}, \rfc{7606}, \rfc{7607}, \rfc{7705}. \subsection{Properties} \begin{itemize} \item Uses tcp/179 as \gls{dst} port \item Sends keep-alive message every 1 minute \item Keep-alive message is 19 byte long \end{itemize} Be ware if sessions are terminated immediately upon trying to establish connection. Try debugging following points. \begin{itemize} \item tcp/179 is not open, \item random port 1023> is not open, \item incorrect peer-ip, \item incorrect peer-as. \end{itemize} \subsection{Route exchange} Exchanging routes between routers is a reliant and tolerant manner is \glspl{bgp} 1-advantage over \gls{ospf}/\gls{isis}/\gls{rip}/\gls{eigrp}. The sheer tuning and control mechanisms \gls{bgp} can offer is simply astounding. Route-maps is the key and access-lists just one option. \subsubsection[Route-maps]{Route-maps mechanism} Route-maps is used to target a select set of routes and either modify/add/remove attributes attached to the select route-set. \begin{itemize} \item Routes can be aggregated between \glspl{as}. \item Properties can be changed on the fly by matching \begin{enumerate}[label={\alph*)}] \item \Gls{bgp} communities, \item \Gls{ip} prefix, \item \Gls{bgp} as-path, \end{enumerate} \end{itemize} An simple example of using route-maps is \begin{cisco} ip prefix-list 1 permit 172.16.0.0/16 ip prefix-list 2 permit 192.168.1.0/24 ! route-map RED permit 10 match ip address prefix-list 1 set ip next hop 10.1.1.1 continue 20 ! Continues to apply rules normally only ! applied to prefix-list 2. To apply to ! prefix-list 1, too. ! Any attributes set in '20' will ! override any set during '10'. route-map RED permit 20 match ip address prefix-list 2 set ip next hop 10.2.2.2 ! Last rule overrides previous rules from ! previous '10' rule-set. \end{cisco} When rules from a rule-set is chained together as shown above. The last rule will override all previous set values regarding the attribute being applied. In this case \texttt{next-hop} from 'permit 10' is overridden in 'permit 20'. \subsection[States]{BGP States} The states is the way \gls{bgp} handles peer/neighbor connection establishing. The \underline{playbook} so to speak. \begin{enumerate} \item Idle: \gls{bgp} while initializing refuses all incoming connections. Will initiate \gls{tcp} connection to peer. \item Connect: Waits for \gls{tcp} connection. If \gls{tcp} is established goes to state OpenSent. If \gls{tcp} is \textit{un}successful ConnectRetry timer is started and then goes to Active state. \item Active: When ConnectRetry counter reaches 0 goes to state Connect. \item OpenSent: Sends \gls{msg} to remote node. Waits for reply \gls{msg} before going to OpenConfirm. \item OpenConfirm: Nodes exchange keepalive \glspl{msg} and goes to Established state if successful. \item Established: Nodes can now exchange KeepAlive, Updates, and Notification \glspl{msg}. \end{enumerate} \subsection[iBGP]{Internal Border Gateway Protocol} \gls{ibgp} is running \gls{bgp} within the same \gls{as} between routers. Much like running a general \gls{igrp} in the network. Tradition one has to be fearful of creating \textit{routing loops} in the network. \glspl{bgp} mechanism for this is using either \begin{mylist} \item Full Mesh, or \item \glspl{rr} \end{mylist}. Problems by running \textit{Full Mesh} is the formula of \[ iBGPsessions = n*(n-1)/2 \] \note{where $ n $ is the number \gls{ibgp} speakers} which results in scaling problems as \gls{ibgp} speakers are added to the \gls{as}. \textit{\glspl{rr}} solves this problem by peering with all \gls{ibgp} speakers in the \gls{as}. All \gls{ibgp} speakers are then clients of the \glspl{rr}. This in turn helps maintainability by also advertising routes learnt from \gls{ibgp} clients to clients. Classic filtering/mathing route-maps/prefix-filters can be used to \textit{not} advertise all routes select group of clients from the \glspl{rr}. \subsection[eBGP]{External Border Gateway Protocol} \gls{ebgp} connections is inherently different from \gls{ibgp} connections. Some assumptions are made such as \begin{enumerate} \item a \gls{ttl} of 1 is the default\footnote{Multi-hop \gls{ebgp} can thou be configured and therefore increase the max-\gls{ttl} value}, \item distance is set to 20 compared to 200 for \gls{ibgp} routes, \item Next hop does \textit{not} change for \gls{ebgp} routes advertised to \gls{ibgp} neighbours \textit{by-default}\footnote{Often times it is necessary to tell a router to set itself as the next-hop before advertising to \gls{ibgp} neighbours}. \end{enumerate}