[c-nsp] Different Traffic thru BGP links

[Brian Turnbow]

If your using 2 routers twords the customer you can set up traffic shaping tunnels to each router using MPLS, one for the direct peer traffic, one for internet and  
use local weight to route twords the customer, that way you could still have redundancy

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Zaheer Aziz
Sent: martedì 23 novembre 2004 16.08
To: BRA-SAO-Tomaiz,Anderson Goncalves
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Different Traffic thru BGP links
Importance: High

At 04:23 PM 11/22/2004 -0200, BRA-SAO-Tomaiz,Anderson Goncalves wrote:
>Hi Guys,


This is how I understood your problem,

You have ISP connections on Link C and D.

You have two providers on say link A and B that must use Link C of your ISP.

Link D of your ISP must only be used by your customers and others for general Internet traffic.

PBR on A and B was your first thought but due to high amount on traffic on Link A and B, it could be an issue.

You could use MPLS_VPN and put A, B and C in a VRF but you must understand that you will loose redundancy, for not using link D in case of failures on C. You could solve this with lots of vrf aware statics as backups but it may not scale.

If my understanding of your topology is right then Local_pref that others have suggested will not work because all traffic will follow Link C which is what you dont desire.

Thanks
Zaheer


>I have a situation where an ISP (running BGP) will have two links with 
>my AS backbone.
>In one of them it must allow to pass only peering traffic (from two 
>other providers that I have direct connection) and thru the other one 
>normal internet traffic.
>To route traffic inbound my AS is simple. Only using local-preference 
>in the BGP at the customer side, but the problem is how to route 
>traffic outbound my AS to the customer side, since the prefixes 
>announced are keeped at the same routing table and are the same on both links.
>Use PBR is not desirable, cause there are too many prefixes and to much 
>traffic thru these connections. I'm also running MPLS VPN in my 
>backbone, if it has some solution based on this.
>
>Does anyone has a solution or see it before?
>
>Thanks for help!
>
>Anderson
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net 
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/