BGP or OSPF over AutoVPN instead of routes learned by VPN registry

[MirzaDz]

Hello,

We have enviroment where we have one Hub connected to L3 switch and behind that L3 is our networks which needs to be accessible from spokes. We have also couple of spokes. We have couple of static routes on hub pointing on l3 switch, and from l3 switch we have one summary route to spokes pointing on hub. Through local networks config section we enabled network for autovpn.  I am curious why maybe we could replace this with running BGP on autovpn and BGP between Hub and L3 switch or OSPF ? I know that if we add spoke that network of new spoke will be automaticly advertised to the hub and l3 switch, and also if we add or remove some network behind l3 switch the same will be advertised to the hub and spokes. Is there some other benefit or is there some scenario where we can get benefit?Does anyone have experience or any advice regarding this case?

Best regards,

[RaphaelL]

I am curious why maybe we could replace this with running BGP on autovpn and BGP between Hub and L3 switch or OSPF ?

Yes you could run eBGP between your HUB and L3 switch.

Is there some other benefit or is there some scenario where we can get benefit?

You won't have to maintain static routes which will become a nightmare if your network scales.

[MirzaDz]

Hello,

Ok so the main reason is to avoid creating static routes on our Hub and our L3 switch if i udnerstand good? Is there anything else maybe?

[GreenMan]

BGP - as a dynamic routing protocol - may also help in redundancy / resilience scenarios;  finding an alternative route around a failed component automatically, without manual intervention.  It's not necessarily clear to me that it would be needed in your environment, but that's usually a key reason for using dynamic routing generally.