RE: asymmetric routing?

From: Corbin, Kevin (Kevin.Corbin@LibertyMutual.com)
Date: Fri Feb 07 2003 - 12:45:03 GMT-3


I agree that BGP would be overkill for this scenario, From router A's
perspective I would either adjust the delay of the FR making it less
preferabble for destinations beyond router B, thus making it transmit on
ISDN, and from RB make the raise the delay on the ISDN. Another option
would be to do some simple PBR.

-----Original Message-----
From: Albert Lu [mailto:albert_lu@optushome.com.au]
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 9:00 AM
To: 'Peter van Oene'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: asymmetric routing?

It's a little bit more complicated than just running BGP. Firstly,
localpref doesn't work for 1 router in 1 AS (but I've heard of doing
another BGP peer to the router's own loopback), and secondly running BGP
with 1 AS per router in a private network environment with 2 routers is
abit of an overkill just to get traffic engineering.

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Peter van Oene
Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 12:49 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: asymmetric routing?

At 09:05 PM 2/7/2003 +1000, David Heaton wrote:
>this is a client thinking of things for you to waste your time on !
>
>2 sites, 2 WAN connections between them
>one ISDN, the other frame relay, both 128Kbps
>
>client wants to transmit traffic on the ISDN, and
>receive traffic on FR:
>
>A - - -ISDN - -> B
>A <- - - FR - - - B

This is simply done in BGP using pref to control one direction and
prepends or med to control the other. OSPF and ISIS could handle it
equally well as
metric are unidirectional and thus could be oppositely weighted. I'm
not
immediately aware of a way to handle it with EIGRP, though it is not a
protocol I work with very much.

>I haven't done this before, and don't know if it can be
>
>Currently there is EIGRP at both ends, but that can be
>changed easily
>
>Any suggestions appreciated
>
>David
>.
.
.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2003 - 11:06:15 GMT-3