1. Home
  2. Cisco Systems
  3. OSPF or BGP

OSPF or BGP

Hi I have a customer on my wireless system that wants a DSL fail over incase the wireless goes down. The current setup is a 3660 in my main office with a 4 port ATM card and the ATM's from the telco. It is also the default router for the wireless system. At the customers is a

3620 with a 2e2w and 2w MN's and a WIC-1ADSL. What would be the best way to set it up so that if the wireless goes down then all of the traffic is sent out over the DSL. I would like for the route to reverse back to the wireless when the link comes back up.

I have been searching around Cisco but have not seen a BGP setup where both links a terminated on the same to routers.

Thanks for the help

Kelly

Reply to
Kelly Opal
Loading thread data ...

either will work, but BGP is designed for the case where 2 different sets of people look after the different ends of the link.

BGP is also going to be easier to scale and limit complications when the 2nd customer comes along....

i suspect there are as many ways of doing this as people who set it up. i suggest you run EBGP, with each link peering between the addresses on the physical connection - so if you lose the preferred link the BGP also goes down.

OSPF is really best where there is some "trust" between whoever runs the 2 boxes (interior gateway protocol).

i have seen a fair number where there are 2 or 4 x 2 Mbps links in parallel with BGP across each - mainly for load balancing on MPLS services.

So - use such an example if you can find one, and then deliberately bias the traffic to the preferred link once you get it working.

Reply to
stephen

Hi there,

sorry bu i have to disagree with stephen, i dont know , but i dont like the idea of running BGP internally. BGP takes alot of memory and cpu and it needs someone who understands how it works and how to troubleshoot it ..

BGP is a nice protocol, but you must know what are you doing exactly. i would suggest you use, other solutions such; floating static routes. "easy , simple and does not consume alot of your resources"

cheers, Zuhair Al-Zubaidi

Reply to
Zuhair Al-Zubaidi

If your customer needs/wants rapid convergence then you would use an IGP (RIPv2, EIGRP, OSPF or ISIS). BGP with default timers will be significant slower to convergence than an IGP and is not needed to address the failover reuqirement.

All you need to do is give your customer default dynamically

Reply to
Merv

If you're still looking for a solution to this, you should find the white paper on my web site "Redundant Routes in IPSec VPNs" informative. It includes a discussion of the trade offs between exterior and interior routing protocols in applications where the two routers involved are not directly connected.

Good luck and have fun!

Reply to
Vincent C Jones

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.