[c-nsp] Dual-homing without BGP

[Vincent De Keyzer]

A general comment on this, as people are (kindly) proposing other vendor's
hardware: we would like it to base on Cisco gear, in order to avoid having
to buy everything twice (for spares), training everybody, etc.

Now, if it's really a bad idea to do it with Cisco (and for instance PBR),
then I also would like to know it...

Vincent


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Sergio Ramos
> Sent: jeudi 16 février 2006 16:23
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Cc: vincent at dekeyzer.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Dual-homing without BGP
> 
> Hi!
> 
> Please check this thread:
> http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2005-August/023220.html
> 
> And my entry here:
> http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2005-August/023330.html
> 
> regards,
> 
> Sergio.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Vincent De
> Keyzer
> Sent: 16 February 2006 15:55
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Dual-homing without BGP
> 
> Hello,
> 
> can you please review the following suggestion ?
> 
> 
> Requirements:
> 
> *         Customer is a communications agency (i.e. more "content" than
> "access").
> 
> *         They are doing serious things like e-commerce on the Internet
> connection they have with provider T (like 'trusted'). It's a 2M line.
> 
> *         They have a /23 which is announced as such on the global BGP
> network by provider T (although it's part of one of T's /16s)
> 
> *         They are considering to buy a second Internet link at 25 Mbps
> from
> provider N (like 'new'), on which they plan to do less serious things
> like
> video streaming.
> 
> *         They also want to have some redundancy: if T link goes down,
> traffic goes out via N - but if N goes down, they don't want streaming
> to
> clog the limited T bandwidth, so no streaming in that case.
> 
> 
> 
> Would the following solution work?
> 
> 1.       Customer have a router that would NOT run BGP (in order to
> limit
> investment), and that would be connected to N, T and servers LAN.
> 
> 2.       N would also announce the /23 to the world.
> 
> 3.       If link to T or N fails, T or N respectively stop announcing
> the
> /23.
> 
> 4.       With a combination of PBR (which I am not too familiar with)
> and
> floating routes, they would control on which link traffic will go out
> (based
> on server source address) according to the last requirement above.
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> Vincent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/