[c-nsp] Two HUBS-Location Specific Spokes-Redundant to each other

vasu varma ypkcar at gmail.com
Fri Jul 26 01:41:27 EDT 2013

Hi Lumbis,

Thanks for your response.

Its not all about latency, latency may vary depending on the backbone
utilization irrespective of closest location.

I want in such a way that east locations should prefer the default route
from East HUB with West HUB acting as secondary and west locations should
prefer the default route from WEST HUB with EAST HUB acting as secondary.

One location may be equally destined in terms of latency or distance but we
should be able to configure as we desired.


On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:32 PM, Pete Lumbis <alumbis at gmail.com> wrote:

> If by "closest" you mean "lowest latency" you probably want to look at
> something like PfR to do this dynamically for you.
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:48 AM, vasu varma <ypkcar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Team,
>> I have a requirement in such a way that there are two HUB's, one in
>> Newyork
>> and other in LOS Angeles. The spoke locations will access the HUB location
>> whichever is closer geographically and the other acts as the backup for
>> that particular site.
>> If both the HUB's injects default route into the cloud, how can I
>> configure
>> the iBGP attributes to select the best path based on the closest physical
>> location.
>> Our's is a MPLS cloud with multiple customers sharing the same Infra.
>> Can someone assist me with the solution approach and most importantly the
>> changes that I need to do in my network.
>> Regards
>> Yaswanth
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list