Interim followup:
This is probably the bestpath to follow, but I have not been able to
make the RPM probes work. I’ll follow that up in a separate thread.
Once that is cleared, there will be a final followup
/Per
On 10 Jun 2019, at 21:18, Per Westerlund wrote:
Thanks, good suggestion.
Haven’t used that before. Given that input, this is what I will try:
- Add a dummy linknet to each tunnel interface, since RPM and
IP-monitoring works with addresses and not interfaces directly
- Use two RPM-probes on the primary links to be able to have
independent failure tests
- Use one IP-monitoring policy matching on both RPM-probes, so I can
change routing as soon as one of the two links fail
/Per
PS: Results will be reported once I’m done
On 10 Jun 2019, at 16:34, Hansen, Christoffer wrote:
On 10/06/2019 09:44, p...@westerlund.se wrote:
I know that almost anything can be solved with event-scripts
triggered
by link-up/down for st0.X, but that kind of configuration is
somewhat
hidden, and also probably difficult to get completely correct.
Either the event-scripts triggering you wan to initially avoid or
alternatively change to do dynamic routing between the sites?
Static routes with Remote Probe Monitoring is my suggestion.
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/nce/topics/task/configuration/internet-protocol-route-monitoring.html
Christoffer
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
