From: Foster, Kristopher (KFoster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Feb 20 2001 - 16:37:02 GMT-3
You may need to look into a hardware solution (www.fatpipeinc.com may have
what you need). The major problem with trying to load balance with your way
is inconsistency:
1. you are doing per destination load balancing, in which case if one
provider goes down, or a problem farther up the path occurs, you will
continue to forward traffic in that direction. The only way it will fail
over properly is if the connected interface goes down.
2. you are doing per packet load balancing, other then your packets arriving
out of order or at very inconsistent rates, NAT isn't going to work properly
(which I can't see anyway of getting around having to do NAT without having
your own advertisable address space).
If someone can come up with a decent solution I'd like to hear it too. This
is a problem I've seen come up before without resolution.
Kris,
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Thomas [mailto:psthomas@telusplanet.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 2:02 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: off topic: redundant internet connections for small clients
Hi all,
Does anyone have any suggestions on configurations to improve =
interent redundancy for small clients that cannot run BGP. For example a =
50-100 user company with both a Cable modem and ADSL connection. I could =
see how setting up internal servers with an address from each ISP's =
range would allow access to them from the internet if one link went down =
(as long as both addresses are listed in DNS). What could you do for =
internal client pc's to ensure internet connectivity? A router connected =
to both the cable and ADSL modems could have both listed as default =
gateways and load balance between the two links to optimize bandwidth =
utilization. It would only fail over to the other link if the connection =
between the client company and the ISP went down though. It would be =
unable to sense a failure in the ISP connection to the Internet backbone =
for example. Any suggestions of how to optimize this setup further? =
Without BGP of course ;-)
Thanks everyone,
Paul Thomas
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:28:54 GMT-3