nanog mailing list archives
RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover
From: "Randy McAnally" <rsm () fast-serv com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:55:29 -0500
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 14:26:32 -0000, Ahmed Yousuf wrote
We're doing BGP to announce our PI space and make sure that our PI space is reachable through both ISPs in case one link goes down. This is the primary need to do the BGP here. Unfortunately my boss has requested that we make use of the capacity of both links, rather than pref traffic out of the higher capacity link.
Understood! you would _still_ take default BGP routes, I was implying more along the lines (in cisco speak): ! Tweak as necessary to get a good balance ip route 0.0.0.0 128.0.0.0 <peer1> ip route 128.0.0.0 128.0.0.0 <peer2> Set up SLA tracking on the peer IPs to retract the routes if either peer goes down. Either that or get more RAM on your router and go the BGP-only method. -Randy
Current thread:
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover, (continued)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Brandon Kim (Jan 18)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover George Bonser (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Bates (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Carrozzo (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Bates (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Carrozzo (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Max Pierson (Jan 18)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Ahmed Yousuf (Jan 19)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Randy McAnally (Jan 19)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Ahmed Yousuf (Jan 19)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Randy McAnally (Jan 19)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Michel de Nostredame (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Randy Carpenter (Jan 18)