if you're doing loadbalancing / redundancy for incoming traffic then you're
going to have to go with BGP.
If incoming redundancy is not important, you can use two static routes as
Karl has mentioned.
Moahzam Durrani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
ED49D16A9BE4D41189C000104B2E399864BC1F@sj-exchange">news:ED49D16A9BE4D41189C000104B2E399864BC1F@sj-exchange...
> well most of the traffic is out going for internet use. We get to other
> corporate sites by frame relay on a seperate router. However we will be
> shortly be introducing OUTLOOK WEB access on one of our DMZ's so users
could
> access their corporate mail through the internet, Pix will be doing all
the
> filtering and security.
> Thanks..
> Mo Durrani
> IS&T
> WYSE\EDS
> phone:408-473 1246
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 3:00 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: 2620 and load balancing
>
>
> True load balancing in this situation is actually pretty difficult to
> achieve, especially if you're trying to balance incoming traffic.
>
> Is this connection for incoming access to your services, or is it internet
> access for internal users?
>
> Since you're not running BGP, and therefore not advertising your own
prefix,
> and also since the other ISP connection is not active, I'm going to assume
> that this is for outgoing access.
>
> In this case, the bulk of your traffic is incoming web response traffic.
> You could try using equal weight static routes, one for each connection.
> That would probably accomplish your objective without the added hassle of
> running BGP.
>
> If you have internal services that you want to advertise to the rest of
the
> world, then you most likely need to use BGP. But then you need to get at
> least a /24 assigned from one of your ISPs and this isn't always an easy
> task. Then, you have to apply for your own autonomous system number.
Then
> you should figure out RPSL and register your system and prefix information
> in the Internet Routing Registry.
>
> And that's just for starters! :-) I would seriously consider just using
> static routes, if possible.
>
> Oh, another option is this: check out the Fatpipe Xtreme at
> www.fatpipeinc.com. It's a piece of hardware designed to do exactly what
> you're thinking about doing, without having to make any extra router
> configuration. I don't know much more than that, but we have one of their
> reps coming to meet with us next week. If the product turns out to be
> really cool, I'll post a report of the meeting.
>
> HTH,
> John
>
> >
> > If I have two T1'S from different ISP'S and connect them to my 2620, How
> do
> > I load balance the traffic.Am I thinking of implementing BGP?. At the
> moment
> > I am just using 1 ISP and keeping the other in standby.I would like to
use
> > both together and load balance my traffic. We tried it with both TI'S
> > wortking to gether but packets were being loss, latency decreasing and
all
> > sorts of other funky things such as some users could get to some sites
and
> > others couldnt. Also will it make a differnce if one ISP requires us to
> use
> > NAT .
> >
> > Mo Durrani
> > IS&T
> > WYSE\EDS
> > phone:408-473 1246
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > _________________________________
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!
> http://www.shopping.altavista.com
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
