[j-nsp] load balancing in Route reflector scenario
humair.s.ali at gmail.com
Wed Aug 10 16:32:15 EDT 2011
just to clarify ,
you have :
PE2 with 2 link , 1 to RR1 (let's call it link 1) and 1 to RR2 (link 2)
PE3 with 2 link , 1 to RR1 (let's call it Link 3) and 1 to RR2 (link4)
you could set local pref to link to PE2 to 150 (RR1 to PE2 will be
preferred), and link 2 (PE2 to RR2) as standard 100
then set link 3 standard 100 (PE3 to RR1) but set link 4 with 150 (RR2 to
PE3 will be preferred)
then RR1 has prefered path via PE2 (via link 1 high local pref), RR2 have
prefered path via PE3( via link 4 high local pref) , Each RR may advertise
both route to PE1
then on PE1 , u need load balancing configured , I can't guarantee either ,
but need to be tested.
On 10 August 2011 21:06, Stefan Fouant <sfouant at shortestpathfirst.net>wrote:
> Have you tried the advertise-inactive knob on the RR? I can't guarantee
> that this will work but it just might also advertise the route towards PE3
> as well.
> Of course, if this works, then you would need to enable multipathing on PE1
> Stefan Fouant
> JNCIE-M, JNCIE-ER, JNCIE-SEC, JNCI
> Technical Trainer, Juniper Networks
> Sent from my iPad
> On Aug 10, 2011, at 2:44 PM, biwa net <biwa2go at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear All
> > I have a setup where I need to load balancing routes received from 2 RR
> > IPV4 environment (not VPN-IPV4)
> > I have my PE (let's called PE1) connected to 2 RR (cluster), my
> > subnet eg: 10.1.1.1/24 is behind 2 PE (PE-2 and PE3) which are also
> > of the same 2RR
> > PE-2 and PE3 are sending the same route 10.1.1.1/24 to the RR , which
> > 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
> > (due to lower router id) as best path and I would like to load balanced
> > 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
> > would work or not.
> > 2 option I have
> > 1.So here I am trying to thinking about testing the multipath command
> > 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
> > (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
> > 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
More information about the juniper-nsp