BGP on Windows Desktop(goldensyrupgames.com) |
BGP on Windows Desktop(goldensyrupgames.com) |
I get that it works, but something about this feels...deeply wrong :)
For instance, running services on loopback/dummy interfaces and announcing those IP's with BGP to the core network makes implementing anycast really, really easy.
For any amount of reasonable distinction of "servers" and "routers", you should never need a FIB install on a server. There are good reasons to keep these functions separate (most prominently, address ownership/binding issues with services that are frequently not designed to deal with multiple interfaces/route choices.)
NB: this is not about physical devices. VMs/containers on your host are frequently "servers" while the hypervisor is a "router".
Maybe check your own knowledge base, background and perspective before calling something shitposting?
Stuffing a DFZ table into a Windows box is… not something you do. Neither Microsoft nor Windows admins would really even consider it a viable idea.
The real question is: how does it fail? In the best case, it just drops a little bit of networking performance due to lookups taking a tiny amount of time on each packet. In the worst case, not only do the lookups take forever, but it might also cause overall lockups and "hard" degradation due to cascade effects from the network stack spinning to its death on each single packet.
But considering Windows servers are used as VPN endpoints, and those need to support at least some 4-digit route table sizes, it can't be entirely bad. My expectation would be just mediocre network performance without huge overall disruption.