[c-nsp] PBR two default gateway

[Nick Cutting]

The old saying goes, if you have to implement PBR, either you need more money (BGP), or your design is wrong (use VRFs)

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 4:31 PM
To: Satish Patel; Cisco Network Service Providers
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PBR two default gateway

PBR is a huge PITA, I prefer using VRF and leaking between the VRF's to adjust what i want. it's much safer than PBR imo :)


On 6/23/2016 1:46 PM, Satish Patel wrote:
> I have router with two subnet A & B connected on related physical
> interface. and we have two ISP link so i want to send subnet A to
> ISP-A and subnet B to ISP-B.
>
> is it enough if i do this or do i need to use match interface F1/1?
> Because i want to do whatever coming from my source interface go to
> ISP-A and rest will use ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 ISP-B
>
> !
> interface FastEthernet1/1
>   description subnet-A
>   ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.0
>   ip policy route-map FOO
> !
> !
> route-map FOO permit 10
>   set ip next-hop x.x.x.x
> !
> _______________________________________________
> 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/