Hello, Didn't know about this, I will definetly give it a look. Given it need IOS XE to run, I believe it needs an ASR platform to run (just like OP requested).
I'm used to doing this the old way with 7200VXR series ;-) Thanks for the hint. Best regards. Y. 2014-08-18 19:22 GMT+02:00 Arie Vayner (avayner) <[email protected]>: > Actually, there is a solution for that... It's called ODAP and it allows > your LNS to pull address pools from a server. > So you can have smaller pools (like /25's or /24's) assigned from the > server and announced as aggregates. > Even a /25 is better than 128x/32's > > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios/ios_xe/ipaddr/configuration/guide/xe_3s/iad_xe_3s_book/iad_dhcp_sod_apm_xe.html > > It has been a while since I played with it, but the concept should be > mostly the same. > > Arie > > -----Original Message----- > From: Youssef Bengelloun-Zahr [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 10:17 > To: Arie Vayner (avayner) > Cc: Mike; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] LNS question asr 1002 > > Hello Arie, > > I hear you and your arguments are perfectly understandable. The only > downside I see with per-LNS pool is lack of redundancy in case of hardware > failure. > > In previous companies I worked for, PPPoL2TP used to terminate randomly on > a pool of LNS based on a radius Round Robin algorithm. Excellent for > balancing sessions evenly (or not) but the one downside is that you have to > re-announce /32s inside your BGP domain. If you RRs can handle it, then why > not do it... > > I guess that this isn't a problem for small to medium sized ISPs, but > that's a different song for big ones. > > Again, it'll all depends on your business case and pre-requisits. > > Best regards. > > > > > Le 18 août 2014 à 18:50, "Arie Vayner (avayner)" <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > > > You may actually want to look at summarizing this. The best practice > would be to have a per-LNS pool (either locally managed or from RADIUS) and > advertise the summary from the LNS up to the network. > > You may need to redistribute also connected routes for "fixed IP" > services where a user may have a custom IP from the RADIUS. > > > > Not summarizing means that every connection (and disconnection) is a BGP > update driving your CPU utilization across the BGP domain... > > > > > > Arie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cisco-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > > Of Mike > > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2014 09:23 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] LNS question asr 1002 > > > > > >> On 08/17/2014 08:24 PM, Edwardo Garcia wrote: > >> Secondly, how does one handle running two LNS servers? How does the > >> border router know which edge (LNS) to forward too for a particular > >> IP? > > > > I do it with iBGP where my router is advertising individual /32's. > > Yes it makes the route tables longer but it works well in my > environment. YMMV. > > > > Mike- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > -- Youssef BENGELLOUN-ZAHR _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
