Hi,

Perhaps i Will Say a mistake, but why do not you use radius account type to 
accure thé sécurity of your ppp sessions With two l2tp tunnels.

Best regards,
--
Christophe

Envoyé de mon téléphone, veuillez excuser ma brièveté.

Le 4 mai 2012 à 11:09, ar <[email protected]> a écrit :

> Yeah right...good info.
> thanks.
> 
> What if HSRP doesnt have preempt so it wont switch back after a failure?
> 
> Im thinking of dual protection.
> LACs has two initiate-to commands for 2 LNS.
> Then LNS with HSRP without preempt.
> 
> any thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Arie Vayner (avayner) <[email protected]>
> To: ar <[email protected]>; cisco-nsp <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 12:42 AM
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
> 
> 
> With HSRP, every time you do a failover, all sessions would drop, and have to 
> be reestablished.
>  
> Using the redundancy model, you can have graceful recovery and switchover if 
> you want to control it.
>  
> For example, if you had a failure, and one LNS went down, all sessions would 
> reestablish on the 2nd one (that is the same as in HSRP), but now when the 
> other box comes up it does not drop all the sessions again and switches them 
> back.
> Only new sessions would be sent to the recovered LNS, and you can move the 
> other sessions during a maintenance window…
>  
> Actually, I would just suggest running them in active/active mode. This way 
> you actually know they are both up and running and do not have to worry about 
> making sure the backup is ready…
>  
> Arie
>  
> From:ar [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 07:27
> To: Arie Vayner (avayner); cisco-nsp
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
>  
> Thanks Arie.
>  
> Any disadvantage of using HSRP compared to multiple initiate-to commands on 
> the LAC?
> I want HSRP due to the reason i can control who is the active and standby LNS.
> LNS  is mine, while LAC is on the access provider side.
>  
> thanks
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From:Arie Vayner (avayner) <[email protected]>
> To: ar <[email protected]>; cisco-nsp <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 7:09 PM
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
> 
> Better use discrete IP addresses. Loopbacks are mostly recommended.
> On your LAC you can specify multiple IPs (that can come from RADIUS...).
> 
> This would allow you to load share, running your LNSs in Act/Act mode...
> 
> Look here:
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk827/tk369/technologies_white_paper09186a00800a43e9.shtml#wp1002265
>  
> 
> Arie
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of ar
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 00:37
> To: cisco-nsp
> Subject: [c-nsp] 7206 LNS/L2TP using HSRP
> 
> Guys,
> 
> 
> I'm planning to terminate L2TP to LNS using HSRP. 
> So there will be LNS redundancy.
> Is this possible?
> I've read that terminating L2TP to the HSRP address has some issues.
>  
> Or better to use multiple initiate-to commands on the LAC?
> Any other options for fail-over/redundancy?
> 
> thanks
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected] 
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Reply via email to