Is there a specific reason for not having made use of BGP to handle
the failover to your upstream provider(s)? Depending on how you
connect to them, you may or may not require a /24 and your own ASN to
provide proper redundancy. You could even get by with only receiving
a default route from them (eliminating the need for lots of memory).
Anyhow, not sure how many upstreams you have, how you connect to them,
or whether they can do BGP or not, so I'll leave it at that for now.
Might be worth talking to them about it though, to see if it's an
option.
David
On 22/05/2008, Junaid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to uplink traffic for some of my customers via ISP-1 using
> routing-instance on an M-series route (relevant config snippet
> attached).
>
> routing-instances {
> uplink-to-ISP1-ri {
> instance-type forwarding;
> routing-options {
> static {
> route 0.0.0.0/0 next-hop a.b.c.d;
> }
> }
> }
>
> My problem is that the next-hop ip a.b.c.d is on an Ethernet
> sub-interface on the same router that does not go down. Hence when I
> lose connectivity to my ISP-1, the traffic uplinked via this routing
> instance is dropped. Can I configure floating static routes using
> 'qualified-next-hop' within this routing-instance - will this help
> considering that fact that my next-hop IP address in this case is
> assigned on an Ethernet sub-interface? Or can we have another solution
> to the problem like some method to detect that the next-hop IP is
> unreachable so that a different next-hop can kick in?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Junaid
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
