Yup, what he said :) It will mean though that you will need 2 tunnel interfaces to place into 2 different routing instances.
This can be a little complicated but we dont really have many options if the 2 remote sites have the same addressing scheme. HTH On 14 September 2012 15:59, Per Westerlund <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, static routes work. What happens is that you put the two tunnels in > different routing instances. The static route/routes used in each routing > instance are completely independent of each other. > > /Per > > 14 sep 2012 kl. 15:55 skrev pkc_mls: > > > Le 14/09/2012 2:55, Per Westerlund a écrit : > >> The only way to handle this that I know of is FBF, in this case to > implement source-based-routing. You have to pick a different tunnel > depending on which source address you see. > >> > >> I don't have access to my systems right now so I can't send an example, > but there are plenty of examples on either in Juniper KB or Juniper forums. > The common use case is with 2 default routes to 2 different ISPs, and > having to chose one or the other based on what local IP address is used. > >> > >> /Per Westerlund > >> > >> > > Do you know if the static nat will work in such a scenario, because I > have a lot of static nat rules configured > > for traffic through this tunnel ? > > > > It becomes complicated for a simple multi proxy ID configuration. > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
