[c-nsp] Traffic Engineering Internet links automatically

[Kim Onnel]

the problem is that its inbound yes, no problem in our outbound, i thought
dmzlink-bw is only used for outbound

On 3/27/06, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) <oboehmer at cisco.com> wrote:
>
> BGP multi-path (e+iBGP) along with dmzlink-bw would do the trick to
> perform unequal cost load-sharing over those links, don't know if
> Juniper supports this or a similar feature for your upstream ISP to do
> the same on their end.
> In which direction are your links filling up? Inbound, I guess?
>
>         oli
>
> Kim Onnel <> wrote on Monday, March 27, 2006 3:09 PM:
>
> > I am sure someone has been in my place before and there is something
> > that can be done on this matter, i'll try to explain again in more
> > details, maybe i missed something, i hope i can get suggestions on
> > Best practices for this
> >
> >
> > upstream \
> > upstream ---- multiple links ----- GW-INTERNET---
> > upstream /
> >
> > the multiple links are all terminated on our side at 1 router
> > (GW-INTERNET) and the upstream isnt 1 router, but same AS
> >
> > Lets say i have 3 PoS and 2 Giga
> >
> > My manager wakes up each day, checks MRTG, finds that the Giga has
> > some room and that PoS is full, so he tells me to move some networks
> > around to achieve this, as Gert said above, it is time consuming,
> > specially when moving 1 /24 doesnt do it and half of my day is spent
> > in excel sheets and updating everyone ?
> >
> > What is the correct thing to be done here ?
> >
> > On 3/27/06, Gert Doering <gert at greenie.muc.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 01:33:25PM +0200, Kim Onnel wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 12:11:39PM +0200, Sami Joseph wrote:
> >>>>> What does ISPs do in this situation, do you guys just manually
> >>>>> keep moving/advertising networks between diff. peers ?
> >>>> We get bandwidth in sufficiently large chunks...
> >>>
> >>> You mean that you have enough that you dont need to keep moving ?
> >>
> >> Yes.  Dedicating vast amounts of engineer time to work on "perfect"
> >> load balancing can easily get much more expensive than getting a
> >> bigger pipe.
> >>
> >> (It all depends on circumstances, of course.  In Germany, uplink
> >> bandwidth is fairly cheap these days, and if you're located in the
> >> right places, it's just a matter of throwing a fiber link across the
> >> building, and getting a GigE uplink port with some 100 Mbit/s. of
> >> "committed" bandwidth)
> >>
> >>> (And in certain cases we move around traffic to/from certain remote
> >>> ASes
> >>>> by prepending inbound and using communities/prepends outbound)
> >>>
> >>> Well, in our case, we want to tailor it to do the maximum
> >>> utilization possible, so any few megabits is useful, i dont think
> >>> that prepending and communities are the way ?
> >>>
> >>> Any known methods ?
> >>> Is OER used for this ?
> >>
> >> OER will do for outgoing traffic.
> >>
> >> For incoming traffic, you'll have to live with what BGP can give you
> >> - prepending, communities (to have your upstream prepend to certain
> >> peer ASes of this upstream), etc.
> >>
> >> gert
> >> --
> >> USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
> >>
> >> //www.muc.de/~gert/
> >> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany
> >> gert at greenie.muc.de
> >> fax: +49-89-35655025
> >> gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
>