STP is probably not a good fit for this. On the carrier side it can be done with redundant PW and VPLS multi-homing etc etc. Telstra Wholesale just notified me about that exact setup for Ethernet access.
Then on the customer side you could just have a dynamic routing protocol or other mechanism waiting for the failover. Tested regularly of course ;) Or, if you are moving the layer 2 elsewhere the same as the carrier side would cover it. Carriers don't want to give you a way to create loops and also they get to make you pay for another circuit. Win. On Fri, 26 May 2017 at 15:55, Michael J. Carmody <mich...@opusv.com.au> wrote: > More of a general sense, we get Layer 2 handoff as VLAN’s at POI’s from > PIPE/AAPT/Vocus/Amcom/Intellipath/Megaport. > > > > I just want two of them for redundancy. > > > > Again assuming network as weakest point, is not our issue here, I just > want to handle switch failure at my end. So I want 2 x POI’s going to 2 > different switches, with some dump as hell loop prevention as braindead as > (R)STP in place. > > > > Am I being too KISS here? > > > > -Michael > > > > > > *From:* Sam Silvester [mailto:sam.silves...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Friday, 26 May 2017 3:48 PM > *To:* Michael J. Carmody <mich...@opusv.com.au>; AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net > > > *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] High availability options for terminating > point-to-point Ethernet (on Cisco CE) > > > > Idle curiousity - what's wrong with Layer 3 redundancy & why would you > want L2 spanning sites instead? > > > > How would you propose to handle loop prevention between the wholesaler and > yourself? > > On Friday, 26 May 2017, Michael J. Carmody <mich...@opusv.com.au> wrote: > > I always wanted to have duplicate POI’s and have the layer-2 VLAN appear > on both of them, then just different switches for each POI. > > > > This though is a product feature I have never been able to find. > > > > Fear of loops from the wholesaler? > > > > -Michael > > > > *From:* AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-boun...@lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Matt > Selbst > *Sent:* Friday, 26 May 2017 10:56 AM > *To:* Paul Holmanskikh <aus...@pkholm.com> > *Cc:* AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net > *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] High availability options for terminating > point-to-point Ethernet (on Cisco CE) > > > > I'm surprised that everyone's default answer is basically "Don't worry > about the hardware, the network is the most likely thing to fail". I > totally get that and agree. But in a carrier environment you want to be > able to honestly say to customers "we're full redundant". If a > point-to-point ethernet service terminates on a single piece of hardware > then you can't really make that statement. How are the bigger carriers > handling this? I'm especially interested in this as it relates to a Cisco > environment. At what level and what cost can you have a true HA solution? > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Paul Holmanskikh <aus...@pkholm.com> > wrote: > > HI, > > ASR seamless fail-over is not as seamless as it marketed. There are lots > of caveats. For PE redundancy we just run two BGP sessions between CE and > two different PE. But PE is hardly a weakest link, services usually fails > due to access link. > > --- > > NEXON - I.T. FOR THE DYNAMIC BUSINESS > Paul Holmanskikh > Senior Network Engineer > > Disclaimer: The contents of this email represent my own views and not > necessarily the views of my employer > > > > On 25/05/2017 21:13, Ryan Tucker wrote: > > I'd be interested in an answer to this as well. > > > > The ASR1006 apparently does multiple physical route processors with fast > failover for seemingly this purpose, but I'm not aware of anything > smaller/cheaper/more vendor agnostic (and VRRP just doesn't scale to "many" > interfaces as mentioned above). > > > > > > On Thu, 25 May 2017 at 21:05 Sam Silvester <sam.silves...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Doesn't give you a specific answer so apologies if not useful to your > situation but in past teams I've seen the following kind of things done. > > - We matched the customer SLA to the 'lowest common denominator' of the > access link, or the aggregation router (generally we had 24x7x4 hour > hardware replacement, so we doubled that to give time to install and > reconfigure e.g. 8 hours restoration ETA). Often there was a switching > layer between the assorted backhaul providers and the aggregation PE so the > option also existed to re-provision customers but that was never really > something we planned to do. > > > > - We ran multiple boxes, so we spread the impact of hardware outages (and > upgrades). If a customer wanted higher availability, we provisioned them > two links on two different aggregation boxes and ran HSRP or BGP sessions > with them. > > Single boxes failing wasn't something that kept me up at night to be > honest, it's empirical but we had more failures with backhaul providers and > customer premises losing power than we ever had routers shit themselves in > either a hardware or software fashion. We tended to not run lots of > complicated features on the one box, again we tended to build out at least > a pair of aggregation edge devices for each type of service (PPP, > colocation, business services etc) > > > > Sam > > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Matt Selbst <matt.j.sel...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Yes indeed I'm talking about the aggregation router failing. > > > > Perhaps clustering multiple chassis although I don't know any Cisco agg > routers that can do that. > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Sam Silvester <sam.silves...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi Matt, > > > > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Matt Selbst <matt.j.sel...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Hoping for some advice. What is everyone doing for > terminating point-to-point Ethernet services like AAPT's e-Line in a high > availability environment? Cisco environment. > > > > With PPPoE, high availability was much easier as you could just have > multiple LNS's and failover easily when the client would re-auth. With > terminating a VLAN handoff on a /30 or /31 it makes HA much harder. If the > customer edge router dies, failover seems pretty hard. VRRP doesn't seem to > be an option especially with hundreds of customer sub-interfaces. > > > > Do you mean HA on the customer side or on your side? > > e.g. I assume you mean you want to protect against when your aggregation > router dies, as obviously the P2P Ethernet service is kind of a single > point of failure in and of itself, as is the CPE... > > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > > > > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > > > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > > > > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > -- Regards, Mark L. Tees
_______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog