Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 20 Mar 2000 11:06:57 +0100 (CET)
From:      mw@kpnqwest.ch
To:        Craig Beasland <craig@hotmix.com.au>
Cc:        freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Multihoming
Message-ID:  <200003201006.KAA18728@mail.kpnqwest.ch>
In-Reply-To: <A1FB33621BC3D311872D004005F62F6C5821@MANDELA> from Craig Beasland at "Mar 20, 2000 12:20:26 pm"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> article that says (using a cisco router) I can add two default routes, with
> different priorities.  I am not sure how this will help me though, because

If you have the memory for it, get twice full routing. Using default routes,
you'll not detect if one of your ISPs has a partial network outage (but you'd
see less routes, and thus route via ISP2 more often).

> if the primary link goes down, the data can not travel back because the
> primary link is down - we had this problem before when we were blackholed by
> a previous ISP's BGP routing tables).

This sounds odd. If that ISP is dampening your routes (possibly because they
were instable?) they should not announce them to the rest of the world, so the
routes announced from ISP2 should take over. If they're deliberately 
blackholing your routes (like routing them to the Null0 device) and 
propagating them, I'd change ISPs... To make it short: if your link to them
is down, they should not announce any routes related to that link. Period.

Markus


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003201006.KAA18728>