Brad Grant Executive Director for Campus Technology Systems Savannah - Atlanta - Lacoste - Hong Kong Savannah College of Art and Design
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:00:08 To: <[email protected]> Subject: foundry-nsp Digest, Vol 85, Issue 5 Send foundry-nsp mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of foundry-nsp digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Policy based routing? (Nick Morrison) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 22:27:19 +0000 From: Nick Morrison <[email protected]> To: Randy McAnally <[email protected]> Cc: foundry-nsp <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [f-nsp] Policy based routing? Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" as an example of why you might decide to go out on the PBR limb... in a company's network, you may have: a network edge (foundry) with servers with lots of data on them -- a distribution layer (foundry) ---- a core layer (foundry) ---- a core firewall (vendor X) -- a dmz distribution layer (foundry) a dmz network edge (foundry) with servers with lots of data on them for most things, this is fine. data is routed through the whole kit and kaboodle. the core firewall, though, is not capable of 10Gbps (or higher), so for *some* traffic - massive file transfers, etc - we want to skip the firewall layer. for this, we'd use PBR on the core layer and on the dmz distribution layer, using a (say) 20Gbps link between the two (configured with a /30 - the far side is the next-hop.) nothing but the selected special traffic is allowed over this 20Gbps link; everything else goes through the firewalls. for musing. n On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Randy McAnally <[email protected]> wrote: > That's how I do it. > > -- > Randy > > > *---------- Original Message -----------* > From: Nick Morrison <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: foundry-nsp <[email protected]> > Sent: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 21:29:33 +0000 > Subject: Re: [f-nsp] Policy based routing? > > > Silly question, > > > > If all you want is an ACL to block traffic, why not just use an > access-group? > > > > N > *l Message -------* > -- Nick Morrison <[email protected]> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/foundry-nsp/attachments/20100205/0183d437/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ foundry-nsp mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp End of foundry-nsp Digest, Vol 85, Issue 5 ****************************************** _______________________________________________ foundry-nsp mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp
