On 24 March 2016 at 14:16, Nick Cutting <[email protected]> wrote:
Hey, > Apart from cisco certifications, and Cisco Live seminars where it seems PfR > predominantly lives - has anyone actually used this in the real world? > > We are getting more clients interested in recovering from "brown outs" in the > WAN, and I am wondering whether to look at specific SD WAN products, or take > a look at Cisco's PfR I've used it was still called something else. Your test of correctness won't be perfect, the test itself will fail sometime, so design for false-positives. Something like this ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int1 192.0.0.2.10 track N1 50 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int2 192.0.0.2.20 track N1 50 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int1 192.0.0.2.10 track N2 75 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int2 192.0.0.2.20 track N2 75 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int1 192.0.0.2.10 100 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int2 192.0.0.2.20 100 Now you can be pretty liberal on what your N1 test is, could be something like ping 8.8.8.8 or what ever is the main Internet application for your users (facebook?). Then track N2 can be something which is less likely to be false-positive but still guarantees that Internet works to a degree at least, like maybe ping some anycast root DNS. If both N1 and N2 tests fail, you still won't stop trying using the Internet. With this approach you don't have to worry much about PfR or its tests being reliable. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
