Regarding source based outbound routing (with redundancy)

Wed Oct 9 06:04:22 UTC 2013

Thanks for responses on this everyone.

I went ahead with VRF.

On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 12:26 AM, Fred Reimer <freimer at freimer.org> wrote:

> I would need to lab it up, but assuming a MPLS core, can't you do a TE
> tunnel from the source to the desired egress router?
>
> On 10/5/13 2:43 PM, "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 2:08 PM, joel jaeggli <joelja at bogus.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Oct 5, 2013, at 9:45 AM, Christopher Morrow
> >><morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> you really don't want to do policy routing :(
> >>>
> >>
> >> PBR has this tendency to be brittle in the face of topology changes.
> >
> >yup, exactly my point :(
> >
> >> There are much better way to outbound load-balance between providers
> >>offering same or similar quality routes to the same destination.
> >>
> >> multi-AS multipath will do that if the peers are on the same router.
> >>BGPaddpath
> >> can do it for you if the peers are spread across routers.
> >
> >these both will require seeing the longer prefix from the right peer
> >though, right? and selecting that would just be like natural selection
> >anyway...
> >
> >yikes, I suppose you could:
> >  1) generate the longer prefix internally
> >  2) set it's next-hop to something reachable out both (all) peers
> >  3) metric the preferred peer's next-hop appropriately
> >  4) profit
> >
> >but that sounds also kind of messy and prone to odd failures when
> >changes are made :(
> >you'd be adding complexity that you'd have to track through the life
> >of your network :( (and explain to anyone 'not you' working on the
> >network)
> >
> >-chris
> >
> >> joel
> >>
> >>> On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Anurag Bhatia <me at anuragbhatia.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>> Hello there!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I am trying to do a source based outbound routing between multiple
> >>>> upstreams. Usually I picked outbound via localpref but here I wish to
> >>>>use
> >>>> Provider 1 for say 10.10.10.0/24 while provider 2 for small chunk of
> >>>>it say
> >>>> 10.10.10.0/28. I wish to keep failover support and thus so if
> >>>>provider 2
> >>>> fails, I wish to push traffic again via Provider 1.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is this is possible only with VRF or I can push for some specific
> >>>>match
> >>>> rule in route maps?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Anurag Bhatia
> >>>> anuragbhatia.com
> >>>>
> >>>> Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> |
> >>>> Twitter<https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia>
> >>>> Skype: anuragbhatia.com
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
>

-- 

Anurag Bhatia
anuragbhatia.com

Linkedin <http://in.linkedin.com/in/anuragbhatia21> |
Twitter<https://twitter.com/anurag_bhatia>
Skype: anuragbhatia.com