I'm not sure I understand.  If a routing protocol such as BGP is being used, 
this is considered normal behavior, and the routing determination is made 
usually wrt either best route or best bandwidth.  In the first case, a return 
packet would usually follow on the same interface.  In the second case it would 
be determined by however you have set things up (round robin, 2/3rds on one int 
and 1/3rd on the other, whatever.)

If you are multi-homed with two backbone providers with static routes, then it 
is also normal behavior for some packets to enter thru either of your two 
interfaces, and then to exit on the preferred interface (if no preference is 
made clear via routing, then the default outbound interface is the one with the 
lower IP address--e.g. 201.x.y.z would be preferred over 202.x.y.z).

Does that help?

--Patrick Darden
--ARMC


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Drew Weaver
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 10:31 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Asymmetrical routing opinions/debate



        Pardon me if I am using the wrong term, I am using the term 
Asymmetrical routing to describe a scenario in which a request packet enters a 
network via one path and the response packet exits the network via a different 
path.

For example an ICMP ping request enters a network via ISP A and the reply 
leaves via ISP B (due to multi-homing on both networks, and or some kind of 
manual or automatic 'tweaking' of route preferences on one end or the other).

I haven't noticed too many instances of this causing huge performance problems, 
but I have noticed some, has anyone noticed any instances in the real world 
where this has actually caused performance gains over symmetrical routing? Also 
in a multi-homed environment is there any way to automatically limit or control 
the amount of Asymmetrical routing which takes place? (should you?) I have read 
a few papers [what few I could find] and they are conflicted about whether or 
not it is a real problem for performance of applications although I cannot see 
how it wouldn't be. Has there been any real community consensus on this issue 
published that I may have overlooked?

Thank you,
-Drew


Reply via email to