[j-nsp] load balancing in Route reflector scenario

[Zaid Hammoudi]

Keegan,

Look into add-path, something that is not supported in JUNOS yet, but will
be sometime this year.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-walton-bgp-add-paths-06


http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/presentations/Tuesday/Ward_AddPath_N48.pdf


http://www.juniper.net/us/en/local/pdf/whitepapers/2000345-en.pdf


-Zaid

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 13:02, Keegan Holley <keegan.holley at sungard.com>wrote:

> Not sure if others will have a better answer, but I don't think this is
> possible.  As far as I know BGP doesn't support multi-pathing so there
> isn't
> a way to have two next hops used for the same prefix.  You might be able to
> peer with a loopback address and use your IGP to create equal cost routes
> to
> the BGP loopback address.  If you run mpls that obviously complicates
> things
> a bit.
>
> 2011/8/10 biwa net <biwa2go at gmail.com>
>
> > Dear All
> >
> > I have a setup where I need to load balancing routes received from 2 RR
> in
> > IPV4 environment (not VPN-IPV4)
> >
> > I have my  PE (let's called PE1) connected to 2 RR (cluster), my
> > destination
> > subnet eg: 10.1.1.1/24 is behind 2 PE (PE-2 and PE3) which are also
> client
> > of the same 2RR
> >
> > PE-2 and PE3 are sending the same route 10.1.1.1/24 to the RR ,  which
> as
> > per normal behavior is selecting the best route to PE1  ,
> >
> > My issue is that RR is always advertising the route 10.1.1.1/24 through
> > PE2
> > (due to lower router id) as best path and I would like to load balanced
> it
> > through PE2 and PE3
> >
> > Anyone can recommend a way to load balance ?
> >
> > Unfortunately I dont have a lab to test any solution and there are live
> > traffic on this ,so all I can do is guessing is whether the below 2
> option
> > would work or not.
> >
> > 2 option I have
> >
> > 1.So here I am trying to thinking about testing the multipath command
> under
> > the RR configuration  to see if I am receiving routes from both PE or not
> ,
> >
> > 2.  try to put all devices them in routing instance VRF , with the BGP
> > configuration under it (both RR and client) , and RD configured in the
> VRF
> > (but not putting any vpn family under bgp) so that it stays IPV4 routes ,
> > maybe I could cheat the RR to believe these are 2 differentes routes due
> to
> > the RD, but dont know if this works or not .
> >
> > anyone has had similar issue and found a workaround ?
> >
> > does the 2 option above actually work or not ?
> >
> > thanks for any input
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>