From: John Elias (jelias_@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Mar 25 2002 - 12:23:17 GMT-3
Guys,
Here is a good website about BGP with load-balancing examples.
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/40.html
John E.
CCIE #8150
>From: "ying chang" <ying_c@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: "ying chang" <ying_c@hotmail.com>
>To: nsalvato@cisco.com, ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: RE: bgp load balancing - solved
>Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 22:28:11 -0500
>
>Hi,
>
>The problem is solved without using any static routes or "bgp bestpath
>as-path ignore". What I ended up to do is to have R1 have two neighbors to
>both R2's interfaces. Similarly, R2 have two neighbors to both R1's serial
>interfaces. By doing this way, As3 is no longer used in route selection but
>just providing routes between R1 and R2 by broadcast DMZ to both R1 and R2.
>No AD or metrics adjustment are needed, as this setup pretty much eliminate
>R3 from the picture altogher.
>
>Thanks,
>Chang
>
>
>>From: "ying chang" <ying_c@hotmail.com>
>>Reply-To: "ying chang" <ying_c@hotmail.com>
>>To: nsalvato@cisco.com, ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>Subject: RE: bgp load balancing
>>Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 21:10:37 -0500
>>
>>Hi Nelson,
>>
>>Not only do we have to adjust the metrics, the administrative distance
>>also
>>needs to be adjusted as well so we can have two equal paths.
>>
>>"maximum-paths 2" is needed, but after thinking it over, I don't think
>>"bgp
>>bestpath as-path ignore" will help. Even if we ignore the as-path, the bgp
>>selection process will have other tie-breakers to select the best path, so
>>there will be only one path after the selection process, instead of the
>>two
>>paths that we would like. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not sure if
>>static route is the only choice for this question, but that's what I can
>>come up with and that works for now.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Chang
>>
>>>From: "Nelson Salvatorelli" <nsalvato@cisco.com>
>>>To: "ying chang" <ying_c@hotmail.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>>>Subject: RE: bgp load balancing
>>>Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 01:27:27 -0000
>>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>Not only you have to configure 'bgp bestpath as-path ignore' but also
>>>'maximum-paths 2'. The latter if used in iBGP, will only be available
>>>from 12.2S. 12.2S is not out yet. In your case should work since it is
>>>eBGP... And multipath support is available for eBGP since 11.3 If I
>>>remember correctly.
>>>
>>>It's worth a try in the lab... I guess if you adjust the metrics
>>>accordingly (to make them all equal) and ignore the AS_PATH attr, then
>>>it should work nicely...
>>>
>>>Good question!
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>-nelson
>>>
>>>
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: ying chang [mailto:ying_c@hotmail.com]
>>> > Sent: 25 March 2002 00:52
>>> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>> > Subject: Re: bgp load balancing
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > Well, "bgp bestpath as-path ignore" is not available on my
>>> > routers (IOS
>>> > 12.1.11, 12.1.12, 12.0.20) even Cisco's CDROM said it was
>>> > introduced in
>>> > 12.0. So, is it still possible to use the direct link along
>>> > with a transit
>>> > AS to do load balancing?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Chang
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >From: "ying chang" <ying_c@hotmail.com>
>>> > >Reply-To: "ying chang" <ying_c@hotmail.com>
>>> > >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>> > >Subject: bgp load balancing
>>> > >Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 19:23:14 -0500
>>> > >
>>> > >Hi,
>>> > >
>>> > >Can we load balancing R1 and R2 traffic using both R1-R2 and R1-R3-R2
>>> > >links?
>>> > >My thought is if we ignore as-path then R1-R3-R2 path should
>>> > be as good as
>>> > >R1-R2 path, but I'm not 100% sure.
>>> > >
>>> > > R1 (AS1, net 1.0.0.0)
>>> > > / \
>>> > > / \
>>> > > / \
>>> > > R2-----R3 (AS3, net 3.0.0.0)
>>> > > (AS2, net 2.0.0.0)
>>> > >
>>> > >Thanks,
>>> > >Chang
>>> > >
>>> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:21 GMT-3