[c-nsp] MPLS/VPN Loadbalancing with 2 CPE routers

[Bruce Pinsky]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:
> 
>  
>>
>>
>>> Oliver, forget what I said... I've read "will prefer" instead of "will
>>> never prefer" :-(
>>>
>>> It's good to know that another provider is using this kind of
>>> architecture. It's not something we want to use for all our customers
>>> but this specific customer has some constraints
>>> which require to loadbalance their traffic.
>>>
>>> I guess we could also use OSPF and have the same cost for the path CE1
>>> --> PE1 and the second path CE1 --> CE2 --> PE2. What would be the best
>>> in this case ? eBGP multihop or OSPF
>>> with costs ? 
>>>
>>
>> if OSPF is an option, I would prefer this as it is "cleaner" and more
>> "natural" routing, and no risk of running into loops.
> 
> and with OSPF you could even come up with an EEM script on the CEs to
> adjust the CE->PE link metric based on the HSRP status, so you can even
> provide load-sharing when the HSRP master fails over to the "standby" (if
> such a failure scenario would still allow the standby CE to perform
> load-sharing, that is)..
> 

Isn't this a classic case for PfR?

- -- 
=========
bep

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlK5Lo8ACgkQE1XcgMgrtyZQIgCfeLlW2xCJS2KBT2SUnaETsbB9
6fYAmwXRRSA+0iVDu/LbPvgrKIEFeFRB
=o6be
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----