[c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP

[ar]

Hi Tom.
Yes, we'll surely do the LAC-LNS balancing.
I'm just exploring in using HSRP for redundancy.
Getting some ideas from you guys if this is advisable.



________________________________
 From: Tom Storey <tom at snnap.net>
To: Christophe LUCAS <christophe at clucas.fr> 
Cc: ar <ar_djp at yahoo.com>; cisco-nsp <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net> 
Sent: Monday, May 7, 2012 5:32 AM
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
 
You can/should be able to configure the upstream LAC/LTS to load
balance sessions across the two LNSs. Is there a particular reason why
you dont want to do this?

In the case of one LNS failing, all sessions from that LNS would drop
and be re-established onto the remaining LNS by the upstream device.
When the failed LNS is restored, new sessions will be load balanced
across the two again, and you can then even out the load by dropping
sessions from the fully loaded LNS manually.

At least in this scenario, you can minimise the amount of disruption
to roughly 50% of your sessions, instead of all of them - and more
specifically, only to those that actually "notice".

Tom


On 5 May 2012 16:33, Christophe LUCAS <christophe at clucas.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Perhaps i Will Say a mistake, but why do not you use radius account type to accure thé sécurity of your ppp sessions With two l2tp tunnels.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Christophe
>
> Envoyé de mon téléphone, veuillez excuser ma brièveté.
>
> Le 4 mai 2012 à 11:09, ar <ar_djp at yahoo.com> a écrit :
>
>> Yeah right...good info.
>> thanks.
>>
>> What if HSRP doesnt have preempt so it wont switch back after a failure?
>>
>> Im thinking of dual protection.
>> LACs has two initiate-to commands for 2 LNS.
>> Then LNS with HSRP without preempt.
>>
>> any thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Arie Vayner (avayner) <avayner at cisco.com>
>> To: ar <ar_djp at yahoo.com>; cisco-nsp <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
>> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 12:42 AM
>> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
>>
>>
>> With HSRP, every time you do a failover, all sessions would drop, and have to be reestablished.
>>
>> Using the redundancy model, you can have graceful recovery and switchover if you want to control it.
>>
>> For example, if you had a failure, and one LNS went down, all sessions would reestablish on the 2nd one (that is the same as in HSRP), but now when the other box comes up it does not drop all the sessions again and switches them back.
>> Only new sessions would be sent to the recovered LNS, and you can move the other sessions during a maintenance window…
>>
>> Actually, I would just suggest running them in active/active mode. This way you actually know they are both up and running and do not have to worry about making sure the backup is ready…
>>
>> Arie
>>
>> From:ar [mailto:ar_djp at yahoo.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 07:27
>> To: Arie Vayner (avayner); cisco-nsp
>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
>>
>> Thanks Arie.
>>
>> Any disadvantage of using HSRP compared to multiple initiate-to commands on the LAC?
>> I want HSRP due to the reason i can control who is the active and standby LNS.
>> LNS  is mine, while LAC is on the access provider side.
>>
>> thanks
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From:Arie Vayner (avayner) <avayner at cisco.com>
>> To: ar <ar_djp at yahoo.com>; cisco-nsp <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
>> Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 7:09 PM
>> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
>>
>> Better use discrete IP addresses. Loopbacks are mostly recommended.
>> On your LAC you can specify multiple IPs (that can come from RADIUS...).
>>
>> This would allow you to load share, running your LNSs in Act/Act mode...
>>
>> Look here:
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk827/tk369/technologies_white_paper09186a00800a43e9.shtml#wp1002265
>>
>> Arie
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of ar
>> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 00:37
>> To: cisco-nsp
>> Subject: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
>>
>> Guys,
>>
>>
>> I'm planning to terminate L2TP to LNS using HSRP.
>> So there will be LNS redundancy.
>> Is this possible?
>> I've read that terminating L2TP to the HSRP address has some issues.
>>
>> Or better to use multiple initiate-to commands on the LAC?
>> Any other options for fail-over/redundancy?
>>
>> thanks
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/