[c-nsp] routing question

[Dan]

Thats interesting.  Do you have an example of this?

Thanks,
Dan.

Joseph Jackson wrote:
> I believe you could do OSPF on the internet borders and do a default
> originate and then the OSPF costs would take over. Which is what I
> believe the other poster is leading up too.  
>
>
> Joseph 
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net 
>> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Dan
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 7:08 PM
>> To: bep at whack.org
>> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] routing question
>>
>> Bruce Pinsky wrote:
>>     
>>> Dan wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Hello,
>>>>         
>>>> Diagram:
>>>>
>>>>         
>> http://bp0.blogger.com/_ZwoccirELZg/RhPQ4QRWSEI/AAAAAAAAAAM/Jn
>> XNbHL_PQs/s1600-h/routing+question.jpg
>>     
>>>> I have all of my 3550's & 3560's running ospf and the 
>>>>         
>> 2950's & 2960's
>>     
>>>> trunking to the 3550's and 3560's.  I would like for location
>>>>         
>>> 2960-14 to
>>>       
>>>> get its internet from Internet West and location 2960-07 
>>>>         
>> to get its
>>     
>>>> internet from Internet East.  Currently the 0.0.0.0 
>>>>         
>> 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1
>>     
>>>> (default gateway) is causing them both to resort to Internet west.
>>>>         
>>> (hope
>>>       
>>>> this is not to confusing)
>>>>         
>>>> Is there a way I can route the default gateway according to source
>>>> networks without having to use PBR?  The reason I don't 
>>>>         
>> want to use PBR
>>     
>>>> is because if there is any significant amount of traffic 
>>>>         
>> going through
>>     
>>>> the 3550 or 3560 it will cause really high cpu utilization on the
>>>> switch.  Is there some kind of static routing that can be 
>>>>         
>> done, or can
>>     
>>>> use use the 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1 route command 
>>>>         
>> according to source
>>     
>>>> subnet?
>>>>         
>>>> eg:
>>>>         
>>>> if the source ip is 192.168.7.0/24 then use default 
>>>>         
>> gateway 0.0.0.0
>>     
>>>> 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.2 instead?
>>>>         
>>>> The other question is should I replace this switch with a router
>>>>         
>>> instead?
>>>
>>>
>>> If you are running OSPF and the costs are as shown in your 
>>>       
>> diagram, why
>>     
>>> aren't normally IGP metrics taking you to the closest exit 
>>>       
>> point?  Aren't
>>     
>>> you generating default from the Internet gateways?
>>>       
>> On switch 3550-02 the default route of 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.50.2.24 is
>> pointing to switch 3550-24.  The default route on that switch 
>> is 0.0.0.0
>> 0.0.0.0 10.50.1.20 which is 3560-20 and then it hits the router.  So
>> locations 2960-14 & 2960-07 are getting there internet from Internet
>> west because of the default routes.  What I want to do is 
>> have location
>> 2960-07 get its internet from Internet east.
>>
>>     
>>> You could, of course, use VRF-lite and place them in 
>>>       
>> separate routing
>>     
>>> instances in lieu of PBR.
>>>
>>>       
>> I still need the ospf routes to work, does this forward all 
>> traffic to a
>> different destination?
>> Would you have an example of this?
>>
>> Dan.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>>
>>