I think im not clear here, both connections are on our network, the fiber is something we are leasing and reselling, its just dedicated infrastructure for that customer. Handling th eoutbound routing from the CPE router I can do with these policy routes, that I already have, its primarily getting traffic on our OSPF network to come back the right way, I dont want statics or policy routes on the other routers on the network unless I can deliver it dynamically.
I would liketo be able to use some filtering within the inbound OSPF if possible to populate the outbound routing where feasible I should probably provide a diagram On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:12 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: > Netwatch works well, or at least has for me in the past. Use a script to > change path weight if an upstream IP becomes unreachable. > On Jan 14, 2016 10:03 PM, "Justin Wilson" <li...@mtin.net> wrote: > >> +1 for policy based routing. It takes some scripts to utilize it in a >> redundant scenario. >> >> Justin Wilson >> j...@mtin.net >> >> --- >> http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO >> xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth >> >> http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman >> >> On Jan 14, 2016, at 9:51 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm < >> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Im having a hard time grasping ospf filters >> >> Is there a way to announce the /29 out ether1 at a lower cost the i >> announce on ether2 and announce the /30 out ether2 at a lower cost than >> ether1? That way the rest of the network uses the preferred interface to >> route each in except in the case of failover? I could just use source based >> routes with differing metrics within the router for the default routes of >> the two? >> >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Ehhh correction. I think you could do what you wanted with VRF, but you >>> actually could likely get by with policy based routing (PBR) so the routing >>> table was aware of both interfaces. As ugly as PBR is in most cases, it >>> might be a bit cleaner here. >>> On Jan 14, 2016 11:00 AM, "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Look into VRF. >>>> On Jan 14, 2016 10:52 AM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >>>> thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> We have a customer who has two connections to us >>>>> Their firewall eth0 connects to ether4 with a /29 and their eth1 >>>>> connects to ether5 >>>>> They have a 3rd party 10mb fiber circuit on ether1 that terminates in >>>>> our NOC for the /29 traffic and the ether2 connects to our wireless >>>>> network >>>>> for their /30 >>>>> >>>>> the /30 is for their internet traffic, the /29 is for their VOIP and >>>>> VPN >>>>> >>>>> I have OSPF enabled on the fiber, so both subnets are routing through >>>>> the fiber right now, Im trying to avoid any static routes on anything >>>>> other >>>>> than the CPE mikrotik to get traffic flowing the right direction, allowing >>>>> the fiber to fail over to the wireless both in failure and as a last >>>>> resort >>>>> for spillover above the 10mb >>>>> >>>>> Is this clear as mud? Currently we only have static and OSPF >>>>> capability on our network >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your >>>>> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>>>> >>>> >> >> >> -- >> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >> >> >> -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
