From: Vincent Lee (mcne95@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Mar 15 2002 - 17:28:08 GMT-3
Brian,
I am very interesting on your HSRP & BGP
redundancy solution.
Vincent
--- Brian Lodwick <xpranax@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> We had a customer that was on our old old network.
> This network had a
> different AS and addressing. This customer wanted to
> move to a newer
> solution we offered, but wanted to keep the existing
> addressing structure.
> This wasn't much an issue, because accoring to our
> policy we were allowed to
> advertise any customer net above a /24, and they had
> a /22. The old network
> advertised an aggregate so this more specific range
> was preferred and the
> transition worked.
> The reason I went into this whole schpeal is that
> like you said if you get
> addressing space from one of the providers, and you
> get approval to
> advertise that range out of the other provider as
> well, you will have sort
> of a primary / secondary solution and will not be
> able to achieve load
> sharing. Reason being is the provider you get your
> addressing space from
> will most likely be advertising to the NAP an
> aggregate so the other one
> that allows you to advertise the /24 will always be
> preferred over the
> aggregate. If redundancy is the only requirement you
> would be fine if you
> had one provider give you addressing space and you
> advertised it out of the
> other provider as well.
> I wasn't aware you couldn't purchase a /24 from
> ARIN. I'm not really too
> knowledgeable on that type of thing. I only cut
> addressing space from our
> nets when needed for our customers. I have never
> gone out and tried to
> purchase addressing space from ARIN.
>
> BTW I have a neat HSRP & BGP redundancy solution to
> fix the downfall of
> using this combination if you'd like to hear about
> it?
>
>
> >>>Brian
>
>
>
>
> >From: Vincent Lee <mcne95@yahoo.com>
> >Reply-To: Vincent Lee <mcne95@yahoo.com>
> >To: Brian Lodwick <xpranax@hotmail.com>,
> wade.edwards@powerupnetworks.com
> >CC: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Subject: RE: OT: Change primary ISP from PacBell to
> Quest
> >Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:09:07 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >Where can we apply for a class C IP address? ARIN
> >only sell a larger block IP address. I believe if
> we
> >want multihomed with different ISPs (AS), we need
> to
> >setup BGP with both ISPs as peering.
> >
> >thanks
> >
> >--- Brian Lodwick <xpranax@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > The organization I work for will only allow it
> if
> > > the space is /24 or
> > > larger.
> > >
> > > >>>Brian
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: "Wade Edwards"
> > > <wade.edwards@powerupnetworks.com>
> > > >Reply-To: "Wade Edwards"
> > > <wade.edwards@powerupnetworks.com>
> > > >To: "Vincent Lee" <mcne95@yahoo.com>
> > > >CC: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > >Subject: RE: OT: Change primary ISP from
> PacBell to
> > > Quest
> > > >Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:16:17 -0600
> > > >
> > > >To get a true backup you have to apply for your
> own
> > > address space that
> > > >you can announce to both PacBell and Qwest. If
> you
> > > are using address
> > > >space from both PacBell and Qwest then they
> will
> > > not allow you to
> > > >announce their addresses through a different
> > > provider. You can ask if
> > > >they will but this is usually against their
> routing
> > > policy. So you
> > > >don't need BGP. Just use static routing.
> > > >
> > > >L8r.
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >From: Vincent Lee [mailto:mcne95@yahoo.com]
> > > >Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:49 AM
> > > >To: Brian Lodwick; dmadlan@qwest.com
> > > >Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > >Subject: Re: OT: Change primary ISP from
> PacBell to
> > > Quest
> > > >
> > > >We are using the PacBell and already ordered
> the
> > > Qwest
> > > >Circuit.
> > > >Two perimeter routers configed with HSRP and
> they
> > > are
> > > >only connect to Pacbell at this moment.
> > > >
> > > >We are going to keep PacBell as secondary with
> a
> > > >smaller bandwidth. Qwest will be the primary
> > > inbound
> > > >Web traffic.
> > > >
> > > >My first step is asking PacBell and Qwest for
> AS
> > > >peering info then I'll apply for our own AS
> from
> > > ARIN.
> > > >
> > > >thanks
> > > >
> > > >--- Brian Lodwick <xpranax@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I would suggest you replace the Qwest
> circuit
> > > with
> > > > > another provider so that
> > > > > you get some support if it goes down.
> > > > >
> > > > > >>>Brian
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >From: MADMAN <dmadlan@qwest.com>
> > > > > >Reply-To: MADMAN <dmadlan@qwest.com>
> > > > > >To: Vincent Lee <mcne95@yahoo.com>
> > > > > >CC: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > > >Subject: Re: OT: Change primary ISP from
> > > PacBell to
> > > > > Quest
> > > > > >Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:35:29 -0600
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You mean Qwest ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Reading between the lines are you
> currently
> > > > > connected to PacBell? If
> > > > > >so I would set up the BGP connection with
> them
> > > > > first, make sure they get
> > > > > >rid of the static routing of your network.
> > > Bring
> > > > > up the Qwest
> > > > > >connection. Then you could establish the
> IBGP
> > > > > connection between the
> > > > > >two. Are you doing HSRP between the two
> > > routers
> > > > > that you defaulting to
> > > > > >internally?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just a couple of ideas based on limited
> > > info.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dave
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Vincent Lee wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am going to setup a redundancy
> multihomed
> > > BGP
> > > > > > > network with two separate ISPs - PacBell
> and
> > > > > Quest.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Here is my plan.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. setup BGP in our company's perimeter
> > > routers
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2. connect to Pacbell and Quest
> autonomous
> > > > > system
> > > > > > >
>
=== message truncated ===
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:10 GMT-3