Thats the gist of it time to move on the bgp i guess
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Joshaven Mailing Lists < [email protected]> wrote: > 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: [email protected] > Cell & SMS: 1-517-607-9370 > [email protected] > > > > On Dec 16, 2015, at 12:49 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm < > [email protected]> 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 < > [email protected]> 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: [email protected] >> Cell & SMS: 1-517-607-9370 >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> On Dec 15, 2015, at 10:38 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm < >> [email protected]> 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. > > > -- 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.
