Re: Regarding source based outbound routing (with redundancy)

[joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>]

On Oct 5, 2013, at 11:43 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 2:08 PM, joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com> wrote:
> > On Oct 5, 2013, at 9:45 AM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com> wrote:
> >
> > > you really don't want to do policy routing :(
> >
> > PBR has this tendency to be brittle in the face of topology changes.
>
> yup, exactly my point :(
>
> > There are much better way to outbound load-balance between providers offering same or similar quality routes to the 
> > same destination.
> >
> > multi-AS multipath will do that if the peers are on the same router. BGPaddpath
> > can do it for you if the peers are spread across routers.
>
> these both will require seeing the longer prefix from the right peer
> though, right? and selecting that would just be like natural selection
> anyway…

so at this level if I can install two best paths in the fib then great I'll just hash flows between them… this does 
nothing for source based path selection but it does a lot for load-balancing between peers especially if there's 
substantial overlap of equidistant paths. If you have say 2914/3356 and you look at the amount of traffic that you can 
load-balance between them instead of simply tie-breaking on router-id or however far do your path algorythm you get, 
it's significant enough to matter.

> yikes, I suppose you could:
>  1) generate the longer prefix internally
>  2) set it's next-hop to something reachable out both (all) peers
>  3) metric the preferred peer's next-hop appropriately
>  4) profit
>
> but that sounds also kind of messy and prone to odd failures when
> changes are made :(

I go for the low hanging fruit, which is better usage of the information I already have.

> you'd be adding complexity that you'd have to track through the life
> of your network :( (and explain to anyone 'not you' working on the
> network)
>
> -chris
>
> > joel
> >
> > > On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Anurag Bhatia <me () anuragbhatia com> wrote:
> > > > Hello there!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I am trying to do a source based outbound routing between multiple
> > > > upstreams. Usually I picked outbound via localpref but here I wish to use
> > > > Provider 1 for say 10.10.10.0/24 while provider 2 for small chunk of it say
> > > > 10.10.10.0/28. I wish to keep failover support and thus so if provider 2
> > > > fails, I wish to push traffic again via Provider 1.
> > > >
> > > > Is this is possible only with VRF or I can push for some specific match
> > > > rule in route maps?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Anurag Bhatia
> > > > anuragbhatia.com
> > > >
> > > > Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> |
> > > > Twitter<https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia>
> > > > Skype: anuragbhatia.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail