> I am thinking the multiple ASN route is the cleanest but the
> idea of letting a default gateway (via static route maybe)
> out the local upstream connection to reach the other site
> when the backnet link is down sounds like it would work with
> minimal to no headaches but it just some how s
al Message-
From: Adam Greene [mailto:maill...@webjogger.net]
Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 8:38 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Multi site BGP Routing design
Hi all,
We actually have a very similar setup to what Justin asked about, with the
exception that we advertise only some of
From: "Saqib Ilyas"
To:
Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: Multi site BGP Routing design
For a given interconnection between the upstream ISPs for the two site,
once
the direct link goes down, the time required for site A to learn the new
route to site B and vic
For a given interconnection between the upstream ISPs for the two site, once
the direct link goes down, the time required for site A to learn the new
route to site B and vice versa would be different with the different
proposed solutions, right?
Thanks and best regards
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 12:40
> To rephrase the OP's question, would it be BCP to acquire a
> second ASN, and without further de-aggregating, continue
> advertising each site's IP space to the DFZ, but from
> dissimilar ASs as opposed to the same one?
This would definitely be the best approach. You're not introducing new IP
Have you ever known an ISP to not co-operate when it comes to
requesting a BGP session?
>>> yes. this problem is rampant with colonialist telcos in the poorer
>>> countries.
>> Yeah, well, I don't live in a poorer country, and I deal with it here.
>> *cough*
> you asked a question. you
>>> Have you ever known an ISP to not co-operate when it comes to
>>> requesting a BGP session?
>> yes. this problem is rampant with colonialist telcos in the poorer
>> countries.
> Yeah, well, I don't live in a poorer country, and I deal with it here.
> *cough*
you asked a question. you are not
Randy Bush wrote:
>> Have you ever known an ISP to not co-operate when it comes to
>> requesting a BGP session?
>
> yes. this problem is rampant with colonialist telcos in the poorer
> countries.
Yeah, well, I don't live in a poorer country, and I deal with it here.
*cough*
Steve
smime.p7s
De
> Have you ever known an ISP to not co-operate when it comes to
> requesting a BGP session?
yes. this problem is rampant with colonialist telcos in the poorer
countries.
randy
Michael K. Smith wrote:
> On 6/5/09 4:42 PM, "Steve Bertrand" wrote:
>
>> Justin Krejci wrote:
>>
>>> If the private link between the two sites fails, will BGP allow for us to
>>> access the IP subnets at site 2 from site 1 via the internet given that both
>>> sites are advertising under the same
On 6/5/09 4:42 PM, "Steve Bertrand" wrote:
> Justin Krejci wrote:
>
>> If the private link between the two sites fails, will BGP allow for us to
>> access the IP subnets at site 2 from site 1 via the internet given that both
>> sites are advertising under the same ASN?
>
> No, because your rout
Chuck Anderson wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 07:40:15PM -0500, john.herb...@ins.com wrote:
>> This is a good concept but if the ISP route is a Juniper then as I
>> recall by default it looks ahead, sees the as-path routing loop if
>> it were to send it to the other router, and doesn't send it.
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 07:40:15PM -0500, john.herb...@ins.com wrote:
> This is a good concept but if the ISP route is a Juniper then as I
> recall by default it looks ahead, sees the as-path routing loop if
> it were to send it to the other router, and doesn't send it. So
> while you might be a
rivate link.
j.
From: Steve Bertrand [st...@ibctech.ca]
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 20:40
To: Herbert, John
Cc: cmad...@hiwaay.net; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Multi site BGP Routing design
john.herb...@ins.com wrote:
> Depending on your security policies you may want to encrypt said tunnel al
x27;t send it, you're SOL.
j.
From: Chuck Anderson [...@wpi.edu]
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 20:33
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Multi site BGP Routing design
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 05:50:28PM -0500, Justin Krejci wrote:
> If the private link between t
john.herb...@ins.com wrote:
> Depending on your security policies you may want to encrypt said tunnel also.
>
> Other than that, it all depends on it all depends. For example - if you
> receive / or have a default route pointing to the ISP, then the fact you have
> the same AS and won't receive
Chuck Anderson wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 05:50:28PM -0500, Justin Krejci wrote:
>> If the private link between the two sites fails, will BGP allow for us to
>> access the IP subnets at site 2 from site 1 via the internet given that both
>> sites are advertising under the same ASN?
>
> Maybe
dapt your firewall policies to allow for that flow as well.
j.
From: Chris Adams [cmad...@hiwaay.net]
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 20:16
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Multi site BGP Routing design
Once upon a time, Steve Bertrand said:
> Unless someone els
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 05:50:28PM -0500, Justin Krejci wrote:
> If the private link between the two sites fails, will BGP allow for us to
> access the IP subnets at site 2 from site 1 via the internet given that both
> sites are advertising under the same ASN?
Maybe. Especially if both sites are
Once upon a time, Steve Bertrand said:
> Unless someone else has any better advice (I'm sure they do), you will
> need two separate public ASNs. Site 1 advertises it's space out of AS1,
> and site 2 advertises it's space from AS2.
I don't know that it's better advice, but another way to link the
Justin Krejci wrote:
> If the private link between the two sites fails, will BGP allow for us to
> access the IP subnets at site 2 from site 1 via the internet given that both
> sites are advertising under the same ASN?
No, because your router at site 2 will not accept any prefix with its
own AS
21 matches
Mail list logo
