[c-nsp] IP SLA?

[Scott Granados]

+1 for using a routing protocol.  BGP with a private AS is a decent fit here.

On Mar 24, 2015, at 8:48 AM, Gert Doering <gert at greenie.muc.de> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 08:27:59AM -0400, Dan Brisson wrote:
>> I'm curious what folks do in the situation where you have redundant 
>> links to your customers.  I'm speaking primarily in co-lo environments 
>> where you offer redundant Internet connectivity to co-lo customers.  So 
>> for example, you give a customer 2 ethernet handoffs from two separate 
>> Layer 2 switches.   Now what do you do if the customer wants to go to a 
>> routed model using both links.  I could allocate /30s for both links, 
>> but then I have the issue of how to reliably route their block to them 
>> w/out running a routing protocol that will detect if one of the links 
>> goes down.  That's where I came to static routes with IP SLA but I 
>> wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something easier.
> 
> Just run a routing protocol... *SO* much easier.
> 
> We use EIGRP for that (different EIGRP process, distribute-lists in and out,
> so the customer can only announce his networks and will only receive default
> from us), but for customers that cannot do that, we've also used BGP in
> the past - more universally available, but way slower in falling over unless
> used with BFD.
> 
> You could use static+BFD, but I bet that half of the available gear will
> not support that...
> 
> 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/