[cisco-bba] Dynamic routing over L2TP LNS

[Jose Bejarano]

Hi Arie,

Thanks for the info!
Our customers are still complaining that in some scenarios the backup function doesnt work:
ISDN + FSR and /or another PPP session using in both cases a separate cisco router.
We are already downloading static routes using Radius cisco AV-Pairs "Framed-Route" + "Framed-IP"
Is there any difference using 'cisco-avpair = "ip:route=' ?
We are still thinking that routing functionality would improve the overall performance but scalability 
is an issue here. Any other options ?

Thanks again,
Jose

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 14:07:50 +0300
> Von: "Arie Vayner" <ariev at vayner.net>
> An: "Jose Bejarano" <Jose.Bejarano at gmx.net>
> CC: cisco-bba at puck.nether.net
> Betreff: Re: [cisco-bba] Dynamic routing over L2TP LNS

> Jose,
> 
> I would suggest thinking about other means of implementing what you need
> instead of a routing protocol between the CPE and the LNS.
> The scalability of routing protocols is not really at the same level as
> the
> number of PPP sessions per LNS (which may be 1000's).
> 
> Are you aware of the option to download static route entries from RADIUS
> as
> part of the user's profile? This would allow you to basically get the same
> static route on any LNS the user connects to. If they have a failure, and
> the PPP session goes down, the route would be also withdrawn, and then
> readvertised from the backup connection.
> The backup could be another dynamic PPP session (using the same mechanism)
> or could be a floating route with a lower preference metric (or higher...
> depends on how implemented).
> 
> Take a look here:
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2/security/configuration/guide/scfathen.html
> 
> You should be looking for the 'cisco-avpair = "ip:route=' examples.
> 
> Would this work, or am I missing some critical part of the design?
> 
> Arie
> 
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Jose Bejarano <Jose.Bejarano at gmx.net>
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Arie,
> >
> > thanks, yeap, using a routing protocol between the LNS and CPE, users
> are
> > then entering the L3 MPLS/VPN (using vrf Radius attributes). The idea is
> to
> > improve convergence and backup functions
> > adding a routing protocol. Unfortunately there is no much info about.
> QoS
> > LNS<--->CPE is of course another big issue and we are thinking to use
> > per-session QoS using Radius...
> > Any experience would be appreciated !
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jose
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 11.07.2008 um 19:56 schrieb Arie Vayner:
> >
> > Jose,
> >
> > Are you asking about using a routing protocol between the LNS and the
> > remote user's CPE, or are you talking about redistributing the addresses
> > assigned to the PPP session (either the /32 or a static route) into the
> VPN?
> >
> > Arie
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 5:57 PM, Jose Bejarano <Jose.Bejarano at gmx.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> we are terminating via L2TP our PPPoE users on a 7206vxr with npe-g1.
> >> Customers are then terminating these sessions in a VRF using Radius
> >> attributes.
> >> Now we are planning to introduce dynamic routing functionality:
> >> RIP,OSPF,BGP...
> >> Any info/experiences/ideas/tips with using routing protocols over L2TP
> ?
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance,
> >> Jose
> >> --
> >> GMX startet ShortView.de. Hier findest Du Leute mit Deinen Interessen!
> >> Jetzt dabei sein:
> >> http://www.shortview.de/wasistshortview.php?mc=sv_ext_mf@gmx
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-bba mailing list
> >>
> >> cisco-bba at puck.nether.net
> >>
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-bba mailing list
> > cisco-bba at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> >

-- 
Psssst! Schon das coole Video vom GMX MultiMessenger gesehen?
Der Eine für Alle: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/messenger03