Re: [opennhrp-devel] Dual Hub/Dual ISP/Single DM VPN Cloud

[Jean-Francois D. <jf...@gm...>]

hello,

To have redundancy, (multiple paths) you need a means to have dyanmic
routes one way or another. it is dynamic in the sense that is will
only be there if the advertising nexthop router is alive and kicking.
in dmvpn, the interface wont go down if one of the hub goes away,
which means you dont have a trigger to remove the route. spending time
to do it / develop it in ur POC based on dpd via some script, etc .. ;
 or installing/porting/compiling a ospf implementation/bgp/wahtever is
a choice, not sure  the latest is the slowest but is the best one i
think.

J.

On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Alex Levit <ale...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I assume using one private IP for two public is not an optimal idea.
> The problem is that I am trying to build a product which should work in
> different networks with different routing protocols (RIP,OSPF,IS-IS).
> I would like to provide a proof of concept and don't have enough resources
> to support dynamic routing. As for my understanding, working w/o redundancy
> does not require dynamic routing - but in case I would like to have demo for
> redundancy, I see at least two options: DPD inputs for route table reconfig
> and NHRP based choice of next hop.
> Can you please give your thoughts on pros and cons of each solution?
> Do you see any additional option?
>
> Regards
> Alex
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Alex Levit <ale...@gm...> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for your answers,Timo and J-F Dive.
>> Yes, I am trying to have one private Ip for 2 public ips.The reason is to
>> avoid using routing which complicates the implementation.
>> I understand that routing was fixing the issue well.Can you suggest a
>> solution where no dynamic routing is available,only static?Should I
>> implement some kind of logic based on DPD or proprietary keep alive
>> manipulating routing table or there are any additional options to implement
>> redundncy w/o dynamic routing?
>> Thank you in advance.
>> Alex
>>
>> On Feb 6, 2012 8:25 AM, "Timo Teras" <tim...@ik...> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, 5 Feb 2012 17:01:08 +0200 Alex Levit <ale...@gm...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > I have opennhrp running spoke and hub, anything works well. When I add
>> > additional HUB for redun...
>>
>> Sounds to me that you are possibly trying to use single private IP for
>> multiple public IPs. This against the NHRP specification, and prevents
>> you from controlling how the routing happens.
>>
>> For each public IP, you should have corresponding, unique private IP.
>> It is then possible to configure the higher level routing (manual
>> routes, OSPF, BGP, whatever) to favor one link over the other. See J-F
>> Dive's mail for more detail in this.
>>
>> - Timo
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Try before you buy =...
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
> Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
> also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
> _______________________________________________
> opennhrp-devel mailing list
> ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opennhrp-devel
>