>I got the same issue as our company now implement two outlets to same ISP
>but different NAP. What kind of policy routing can we use to load balancing
>and control?
>
>Thanks
>Fanglo
I will make a couple of assumptions.
1. You mean POP, not NAP. NAPs are interprovider.
2. Your address space is assigned by your provider.
Let's assume you have been assigned 1.0.0.0/23 by your provider, from
his block 1.0.0.0/16, and you connect to the provider at the West POP
and the East POP.
You address your western hosts and routers into 1.0.0.0/24, and your
eastern hosts and routers in 1.0.1.0/24.
At the west POP, you advertise 1.0.0.0/24 AND 1.0.0.0/23 to the
provider, tagging them with the NO-EXPORT community.
At the east POP, you advertise 1.0.1.0/24 AND 1.0.0.0/23 to the
provider, again tagging them with NO-EXPORT.
As long as both links are up, the provider will know where your east
and west addresses are, and route traffic to them over the most
appropriate POP router. If either link fails, as long as you
advertise the less-specific /23, all traffic will go to the other
router.
Since all of your address space is contained in 1.0.0.0/16, there
would be no benefit to the rest of the Internet knowing the
more-specifics, so the NO-EXPORT community keeps them from leaving
your AS.
>
>""p.z"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Yes, It seems you have not enough IP addresses to run BGP4.So, policy
>routing is a good
>> choice for you. I formerly implement the similar solution under a similar
>situation
>> except I did NAT on a firewall insteading of on the router.Did you get
>some additional
>> public IP addresses from the second ISP?
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> > I have one ISP with 192K going to the Internet and I am using NAT not
>PAT
>> > to resolve my UN-register to register to the Internet. I now want to add
>a
>> > differant ISP now to the same router, a full T/1. What are the pro's and
>> > con's to this? I need to keep the 192k for reason's but 100 share the
>192K
>> > link and it's slow. I need to setup NAT on T/1 interface I know that?
>should
>> > I use policy routing coming from my LAN to the T/1? would this work?
>> >
>> > Brian
>> >
>> > _________________________________
>> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
>> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________
>> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
>> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>
>_________________________________
>FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
>Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
