[j-nsp] NAT Redundancy on Juniper routers

[Gökhan Gümüş]

Hi Alex,

Thanks for the response.
So there is nothing i can do at this moment :(

Regards,
Gokhan

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Alex <alex.arseniev at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Gokhan Gumus,
> AFAIK this is not possible at the moment since flows are not shared between
> MSDPCs even inside same MX box let alone different physical boxes.
> So if R1 goes down the:
> 1/ TCP flows need to reestablish starting from 3-way handshake
> 2/ UDP flows with ALG need to reestablish starting from scratch (every ALG
> has different procedures)
> 3/ non-ALG UDP flows _can_ continue as if nothing happened depending on
> protocol, e.g. p2p UDP flows will resume from last xferred piece
> 4/ ICMP flows continue as if nothing happened
> If you need physical-box-redundant NAT I'd suggest to use SRX cluster.
> HTH
> Rgds
> Alex
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gökhan Gümüs" <ggumus at gmail.com>
> To: <juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 12:15 PM
> Subject: [j-nsp] NAT Redundancy on Juniper routers
>
>
>  Hi all,
>>
>> I am trying to achieve redundancy on Juniper routers while performing NAT.
>>
>> I have two Juniper MX960 router on the backbone with VRRP setup.I am
>> configuring NAT on R1 successfull.Same NAT rules are existing on the other
>> router but on R2,static route which is pointing sp interface is
>> deactivated.Is there anyway to achieve automatic failover capability on
>> NAT?In other words if something happened on R1, can R2 handle all NAT
>> process without doing anything?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Gokhan Gumus
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
>>
>