[c-nsp] non-BGP ISP redundancy
gm at wavegard.com
Mon Aug 22 09:27:09 EDT 2005
I was thinking of those solutions (F5, Radware) as an option to BGP. Can
anyone comment on the value that they add and their effectiveness vs. a
true network engineering solution with no bells and whistles like BGP??
Grant P. Moerschel CISSP, CCSP, CCNP, CWNT
Sergio Ramos wrote:
> Hi Grant!
> Maybe a bit off-topic but....
> Have you considered a dedicated solution designed specifically for that
> purpose like Radware LinkProof or F5 Link Controller?
> They allow you to be multihomed without the hassle of running BGP while they
> optimize your incoming and outgoing traffic.
> Hope it helps.
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net]En nombre de Grant P.
> Enviado el: miércoles, 17 de agosto de 2005 15:36
> Para: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Asunto: [c-nsp] non-BGP ISP redundancy
> I have an environment with a full T1 connected to a 1700 to ISP1 and a
> frac T1 (256K) connected to a 1700 to ISP2. I don't have the resources or
> address space to use BGP. But I would like to have some egress load
> balancing and some ingress redundancy. I host my mail at this site and my
> web servers elsewhere. I can accomplish smtp redundancy with MX records.
> Any ideas on some good approaches? Thanks
> Grant P. Moerschel gm at wavegard.com
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
More information about the cisco-nsp