nanog mailing list archives
Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss.
From: Fred Reimer <freimer () freimer org>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 18:41:20 +0000
I think they are referring to something like Cisco PBR, where you configure routing policy statically on each hop. Yes, it can be configured to fail over, etc, but inherently it is a management nightmare if you are configuring PBR on each device in your network. May as well move back to static routing on everythingÅ Used sparingly, I'd agree that it does have its uses. One use I can think of is to use PBR to direct traffic for testing a new circuit or path while not cutting everything over. That is, until it is sufficiently tested, and then everything would be cut over and the PBR removedÅ On 10/11/13 2:33 PM, "Jay Ashworth" <jra () baylink com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----From: "joel jaeggli" <joelja () bogus com> you take all the useful information that an IGP could be (or is) providing you, and then you ignore it and do something else.Well, I tell you what. My perception of where this was a good idea is the use case a recent client might have for it: Two consumer-grade uplinks (FiOS 150 and RR 100, specifically); primary application is callcenter, VoIP to a service provider Elsewhere. I would set it up so that all the VoIP and callcenter web traffic went over FiOS *until it failed*, and everything else went Road Runner *unless it failed*. This keeps the general traffic out of the hair of the latency/PPS sensitive traffic whenever possible. Is that not policy-based routing? Why is it bad? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra () baylink com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
Current thread:
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss., (continued)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jared Mauch (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jon Lewis (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Dobbins, Roland (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. joel jaeggli (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Michael Hallgren (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. William Waites (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Fred Reimer (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Christopher Morrow (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Stuart Sheldon (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jay Ashworth (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Fred Reimer (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jared Mauch (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. John Kristoff (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Leo Bicknell (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jimmy Hess (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Octavio Alvarez (Oct 12)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jimmy Hess (Oct 12)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. John Osmon (Oct 12)
- RE: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Phil Bedard (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Bruce Pinsky (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jeff Kell (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Bruce Pinsky (Oct 11)