OSPF is properly sharing the route information for the connected routes properly, right? Like there is a proper route to anything on your network on every router.
Assuming that than we are talking about routes to sources off the network. So the question is how to inform a router that Customer on Subnet A is supposed to use the up-line internet A and not route to the B internet router. I am assuming this router decision is made based on the default route right? So basically you need different routing tables so that each router can detect that this customer is on subnet A and use the routing table for your up-line internet connection A. Am I tracking with your need? Maybe a good solution is to not rely on the distributed default route but setup static default routes in each router to respond to? This has the weakness of not distributing interruptions in the route to the default route which may or may not be an issue in your network. I expect that you could create OSPF relationships to distribute your default route that can dynamically build the secondary route tables using filters and additional OSPF instances however this sounds a bit off the beaten path to me. I expect that you’ll be best off creating an iBGP core network that has the full routing table and sufficient ability to send traffic where needed then expect your outbound traffic to get to this iBGP core that has the full routing table and then it will make the best decision on which ISP to choose based on cost across the internet. This way you can also advertise your entire subnet block with each carrier and potentially use AS prepends to “penalize” one connection until you get the balance you like between your carriers. It is worth considering that having a customer from one side of your network to use that side’s pipe might not be the most efficient path. It is entirely possible that the most efficient path for a given connection is to cross your network and use a better connected up line carrier. Any way… thats my thoughts given the info I have on the matter. Sincerely, Joshaven Potter Google Hangouts: j...@g2wireless.co Cell & SMS: 1-517-607-9370 supp...@joshaven.com > On Dec 16, 2015, at 12:49 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm > <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thats what im doing at the two edge routers, but i dont know how to propagate > that out to the rest of the network. BGP is on the horizon, Its such a pain > to get one of our upstreams to change things, I dont want to change what > theyre anouncing for us until we have BGP in play. Our primary OSPF network > is just getting the finer details (fixing my f&*%ups) hammered out, then we > will move down that path > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Joshaven Mailing Lists <lis...@joshaven.com > <mailto:lis...@joshaven.com>> wrote: > I thought a bit more about what I think your trying to do… > > You can use router marks to create routing tables. You can match the source > address and apply a route mark to the traffic. Then that traffic will use > the matching route table. This way you can have one default route for > provider x and another for y. Is that helpful? > > > Sincerely, > Joshaven Potter > Google Hangouts: j...@g2wireless.co <mailto:j...@g2wireless.co> > Cell & SMS: 1-517-607-9370 <tel:1-517-607-9370> > supp...@joshaven.com <mailto:supp...@joshaven.com> > > >> On Dec 15, 2015, at 10:38 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm >> <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com <mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> right or wrong, we have half our IPs going out one provider and the other >> half going out the other, no BGP today >> >> The whole network is the same area, both edge provider routers are >> distributing default route, so traffic just goes to the closest edge >> (splitting the IP space geographically is not an option) >> We have an EOIP tunnel between the two edge routers sending the traffic >> where it needs to go >> >> We have a final failure where if one provider is down, and that IP space is >> unusabe the other router will NAT that traffic out the alternate provider >> (interim until BGP) the problem is if for any reason the EOIP tunnel goes >> down, the NAT starts even though the other provider is still up (for the >> most part, the EOIP should not go down unless a provider is down but... >> >> >> I have had no success in finding out how to distribute policy routes, maybe >> because you cant or im looking for the wrong terms. Is there a way to say >> x.x.x.x/23 via default route distributed from router X and y.y.y.y/23 via >> default route distributed from router Y ? >> >> Is this a matter of filters and different areas? >> >> -- >> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as >> part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > > > > > -- > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as > part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
