From: MADMAN (dmadlan@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Mar 15 2002 - 20:00:33 GMT-3
What I do is have one ethernet network on which HSRP is configured and
leads back to the customer network. Set up a second ethernet connection
with a crossover cable between the two routers. Configure your IBGP
sourcing loopbacks and you have the redundancy needed to avoid said
problem.
just another way...
Dave
Brian Lodwick wrote:
>
> Well the down fall of using BGP on the front side and HSRP on the back side
> is that the BGP will not know to fail over to the secondary WAN link if the
> ethernet goes down on the primary. BGP will see the serial link still up and
> will continue to send traffic to the primary and it will be dropped.
> My solution is simple. Have 2 ethernet interfaces on the backside of the
> primary all on the same subnet and only have one of those interfaces
> participate in HSRP. The default-gateway for that subnet will be the HSRP
> virtual address. That way even if the BGP does not switch over the packets
> will still be dropped on the line via the other ethernet interface.
>
> Maybe it's too simple and you already thought of it, but I thought it was a
> neat and easy idea.
>
> >>>Brian
>
> >From: 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 12:28:08 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >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