From: Sam Munzani (sam@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Feb 21 2001 - 17:39:01 GMT-3
BTW, This would work great if both of your links are from same ISP.
Regards,
Sam Munzani
CCIE # 6479, CCNP, CCDP, CCSA, MCSE, CNE(5, 4, 3), SCO Master ACE, HP
Openview Consultant
Certified AIX Administrator, Certified Warp Server Engineer
> The problem with HSRP is it is an Active/Passive technology, so you won't
be
> able to load balance between the two. To get a fully redundant load
sharing
> topology without using BGP you would probably need:
>
>
> DSL Cable
> R1 R2
> | |
> |---------------|
> |
> Ethernet
> |
> |---------------|
> | |
> R3 R4
> | |
> -----------------
> Internal
> Hosts
>
> You would use dynamic routing on R1 and R2 to announce default routes to
R3
> and R4.
> R3 and R4 would run HSRP on the internal network side. This means that
say
> R3 becomes the primary HSRP router, and then would load balance traffic
> between R1 and R2. If R3 fails, R4 will become primary router and will
also
> load balance between R1 and R2. If R1 or R2 fail, only 1 default route is
> announced. In this scenario, the network provides reduncancy for a single
> router failure and also a double router failure (provided the failures are
> not both R1 and R2 or both R3 and R4). The network also load balances
> between the cable and DSL connections, which would not be possible if the
> cable and DSL routers were running HSRP.
>
> Also, for a cheaper alternative for DSL, you could use Cisco 827, which
also
> supports FW/IPsec/VoIP...
>
> Regards,
>
> Justin Menga CCIE #6640 MCSE+I CCSE
> WAN Specialist
> Computerland New Zealand
> PO Box 3631, Auckland
> DDI: (+64) 9 360 4864 Mobile: (+64) 25 349 599
> mailto: justin.menga@computerland.co.nz
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter [mailto:peter@web53.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 6:08 PM
> To: Foster, Kristopher; 'Paul Thomas'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: off topic: redundant internet connections for small clients
>
>
> For the Cable connection, get a CiscoUBR924. This is a SOHO IOS router
with
> a cable interface, it even supports VoIP. For the DSL, get a 1700 with
the
> new WIC-DSL card. You can run HSRP between the two, track the WAN link,
> creat equal cost routes out for load balancing, etc. You still may have
> problems with point #2 below.
>
> Peter
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Foster, Kristopher" <KFoster@C1Communications.com>
> To: "'Paul Thomas'" <psthomas@telusplanet.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 1:37 PM
> Subject: RE: off topic: redundant internet connections for small clients
>
>
> > You may need to look into a hardware solution (www.fatpipeinc.com may
have
> > what you need). The major problem with trying to load balance with your
> way
> > is inconsistency:
> >
> > 1. you are doing per destination load balancing, in which case if one
> > provider goes down, or a problem farther up the path occurs, you will
> > continue to forward traffic in that direction. The only way it will
fail
> > over properly is if the connected interface goes down.
> >
> > 2. you are doing per packet load balancing, other then your packets
> arriving
> > out of order or at very inconsistent rates, NAT isn't going to work
> properly
> > (which I can't see anyway of getting around having to do NAT without
> having
> > your own advertisable address space).
> >
> > If someone can come up with a decent solution I'd like to hear it too.
> This
> > is a problem I've seen come up before without resolution.
> >
> > Kris,
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paul Thomas [mailto:psthomas@telusplanet.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 2:02 PM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: off topic: redundant internet connections for small clients
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> > Does anyone have any suggestions on configurations to improve =
> > interent redundancy for small clients that cannot run BGP. For example a
=
> > 50-100 user company with both a Cable modem and ADSL connection. I could
=
> > see how setting up internal servers with an address from each ISP's =
> > range would allow access to them from the internet if one link went down
=
> > (as long as both addresses are listed in DNS). What could you do for =
> > internal client pc's to ensure internet connectivity? A router connected
=
> > to both the cable and ADSL modems could have both listed as default =
> > gateways and load balance between the two links to optimize bandwidth =
> > utilization. It would only fail over to the other link if the connection
=
> > between the client company and the ISP went down though. It would be =
> > unable to sense a failure in the ISP connection to the Internet backbone
=
> > for example. Any suggestions of how to optimize this setup further? =
> > Without BGP of course ;-)
> >
> > Thanks everyone,
> >
> > Paul Thomas
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:28:55 GMT-3