[afnog] Load Balancing btn two ISPs

anyuru francis anyfrancis at yahoo.com
Thu Oct 18 07:06:37 UTC 2007


Well  I if your routers are both Cisco GLBP would be an ideal solution for you or you could use pfsense with two interfaces I think it can do load balancing with round robin but GLBP can do unequal load balancing.


Regards

----- Original Message ----
From: "afnog-request at afnog.org" <afnog-request at afnog.org>
To: afnog at afnog.org
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 1:40:30 PM
Subject: afnog Digest, Vol 43, Issue 17


Send afnog mailing list submissions to
    afnog at afnog.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    http://afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afnog
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    afnog-request at afnog.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    afnog-owner at afnog.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of afnog digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re:  Load Balancing Two ISP links (McTim)
   2. Re:  Load Balancing Two ISP links (Raymond Macharia)
   3. Re:  Load Balancing Two ISP links (Peter Nyamukusa)
   4. Re:  Load Balancing Two ISP links (Mike Barnard)
   5. Re:  Load Balancing Two ISP links (Raymond Macharia)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 07:24:17 +0300
From: McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [afnog] Load Balancing Two ISP links
To: "Mike Barnard" <mike.barnardq at gmail.com>
Cc: afnog at afnog.org
Message-ID:
    <f65fb55e0710142124i7dacbf4eya8ac464bf03913e2 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 10/13/07, Mike Barnard <mike.barnardq at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a scenario that i need some assistance and insight as well.
>
> I have two E1 links, terminating on two separate routers, each from a
> different ISP. My current problem is that both links do have moments
 of
> unexplained blackouts.
>

>snip>

Or, you could try smt like this:

http://www.peplink.com/

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:41:09 +0300
From: Raymond Macharia <raymond at accesskenya.com>
Subject: Re: [afnog] Load Balancing Two ISP links
To: Mike Barnard <mike.barnardq at gmail.com>
Cc: afnog at afnog.org
Message-ID: <471335B5.8020809 at accesskenya.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi Mike,
I currently use BGP to achieve what you are trying to do however if
 that 
seems complicated there is a simple command I used some years back and 
it worked well for me, below is a template.
The lines of interest are the ones that start with the word backup.
 What 
the first line did is provide redundancy so when this link went down 
traffic would be redirected to the other link.
The second line is for load sharing and this means that if the first 
link gets to 80% it invokes the second link and if the link goes down
 to 
60% it shuts down the second link.
You can play around with the percentages to get the right mix for you. 
Note that you still have the two defaults to the two links below.


interface Serial0/0
 description Internet Link1
 bandwidth 1024
* backup interface Serial0/1
 backup load 80 60*
 ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.252
 no ip redirects
 no ip directed-broadcast
 no ip proxy-arp
 ip nat outside
 encapsulation ppp
 no cdp enable
!
interface Serial0/1
 description Internet Link2
 bandwidth 512
 ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.252
 no ip redirects
 no ip directed-broadcast
 no ip proxy-arp
 encapsulation ppp
 fair-queue 64 256 0
 no cdp enable
!
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial0/0
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial0/1

Mike Barnard wrote:
> Hi,
>  
> I have a scenario that i need some assistance and insight as well.
>  
> I have two E1 links, terminating on two separate routers, each from a
 
> different ISP. My current problem is that both links do have moments 
> of unexplained blackouts.
>  
> I would like to terminate both these links onto one router and do
 some 
> load-balancing and fail-over on them. CISCO's OER seems like the
 thing 
> that will work this out, though in what i have read, this needs at 
> least (in my understanding) two routers. The example given in CISCO's
 
> OER manual for deployment on one router depicts two border routers, 
> one acting as the Master Controller/Border Router, and the other the 
> Rorder Router
>  
> Has anyone played around with OER and is there a possibility of 
> getting it to work on one router with two serial interfaces, one 
> loopback and one ethernet interface?
>  
> Is there any other way to load-balance (and have a failover 
> provision) on a CISCO 1700 router? I would have done IP CEF
 per-packet 
> load balancing but i have no control over the end and this wont scale
 
> well with any link failure.
>  
> Appreciate any assistance.
>  
> Regards
>
> -- 
> Mike
>
> Of course, you might discount this possibility, but remember that one
 in
> a million chances happen 99% of the time.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> afnog mailing list
> http://afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afnog
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
 http://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/attachments/20071015/de3b8dc7/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:29:01 +0200
From: "Peter Nyamukusa" <petern at africaonline.co.sz>
Subject: Re: [afnog] Load Balancing Two ISP links
To: "'Mike Barnard'" <mike.barnardq at gmail.com>,
    <ncmaina2001 at yahoo.com>
Cc: afnog at afnog.org
Message-ID: <20071015103118.E4213398467 at smtp.africaonline.co.sz>
Content-Type: text/plain;    charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi Mike/Noa,

When you talk about Load Balancing, the first thing that comes into my
 mind
is BGP because this gives you great control of your routing but the big
question to ask is do you have the  Resources.

Cheers,
--------------------------------------
Peter Nyamukusa (MCSE, CCIP, A+, JNCIA-ER)
?
________________________________________
From: afnog-bounces at afnog.org [mailto:afnog-bounces at afnog.org] On
 Behalf Of
Mike Barnard
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 4:54 PM
To: ncmaina2001 at yahoo.com
Cc: afnog at afnog.org
Subject: Re: [afnog] Load Balancing Two ISP links

Hi Noa,
I am also working on the same senario as we speak, however i would like
 to
share some few things with you. I also hope you are meaning load
 balancing
two upstream providers with a single Router. 
?
yes, i do mean load-balancing,? but i do want fail-over as well.

First, are you considering the CPU and I/O resources given the fact
 that you
are planiing to utilise a single Router for both links.One Single
 Router can
do this job if two WAN interfaces are installed on it.
?
Yes, i have considered CPU and I/O resources for this single router.

Just make sure each interface has its respective ip add from the
 specific
Provider and configure or add one "ip nat inside source ...." statement
 and
one default static route. After you've configured? the new interface. 

If NAT is not appropriate then you will need to consider setting static
routes pointing to each interface but rember to amke one parmanent.
?
It is NAT for sure...

Second, when i hear the word load balancing, some times i think of
redundancy and from the Cisco Implementation point of view, i would
Automatically suggest Two Routers and Hot Standby Routing Protocol
 (HSRP) be
the protocol achieving this goal. 
?
Well, i have one router, with two links coming in from two different
 ISP's.

Hope this helps. Mine seems to work but i am still fine tuning it.
?
This does give me a pointer. This is what i have:
?
one router with two serial interfaces, each interface is configured
 with a
different IP address (of course) for each ISP link. Currently, i have
 two
routes
?
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 A.B.C.E
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 W.X.Y.Z
?
This unfortunately does not load balance and does not take into
consideration one link failing. What i am looking for is a way to have
 load
balancing and fail-over onthis router for these two links. 
?
Like i mentioned, i have looked at OER and it looks like what will work
 for
me, the catch here is that the deployment of OER requires at least two
routers. I was wondering if anyone has deployed OER on one router and
 has it
running and if they can give me some pointers. 
?
Thanks.
?
Regards
?

-- 
Mike

Of course, you might discount this possibility, but remember that one
 in
a million chances happen 99% of the time.
------------------------------------------------------------ 




------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:35:08 +0300
From: "Mike Barnard" <mike.barnardq at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [afnog] Load Balancing Two ISP links
To: "Raymond Macharia" <raymond at accesskenya.com>
Cc: afnog at afnog.org
Message-ID:
    <7dc029620710150435x625f8bf7y170bed750a6f3f7f at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi Raymond, this is interesting. it does solve the redundancy part, but
doesn't address the load-balancing aspect of the two links. the current
problem that im facing is that any one of the two E1's unexplainable
 goes
dead and there is a tendency for one pipe to fill up while the other is
almost not utilised.

that is why i was looking at something that can handle both redundancy
 as
well as load-balance, using the existing hardware and software.

If all fails, ill play around with this and see how well it will scale.
 I
could try backup load 50 5 at least that ensures that the primary link
 hits
50%, it brings in the second link and when it falls below 5% it shuts
 down
the secondary link...

Thanks

On 10/15/07, Raymond Macharia <raymond at accesskenya.com> wrote:
>
>  Hi Mike,
> I currently use BGP to achieve what you are trying to do however if
 that
> seems complicated there is a simple command I used some years back
 and it
> worked well for me, below is a template.
> The lines of interest are the ones that start with the word backup.
 What
> the first line did is provide redundancy so when this link went down
 traffic
> would be redirected to the other link.
> The second line is for load sharing and this means that if the first
 link
> gets to 80% it invokes the second link and if the link goes down to
 60% it
> shuts down the second link.
> You can play around with the percentages to get the right mix for
 you.
> Note that you still have the two defaults to the two links below.
>
>
> interface Serial0/0
>  description Internet Link1
>  bandwidth 1024
> * backup interface Serial0/1
>  backup load 80 60*
>  ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.252
>  no ip redirects
>  no ip directed-broadcast
>  no ip proxy-arp
>  ip nat outside
>  encapsulation ppp
>  no cdp enable
> !
> interface Serial0/1
>  description Internet Link2
>  bandwidth 512
>  ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.252
>  no ip redirects
>  no ip directed-broadcast
>  no ip proxy-arp
>  encapsulation ppp
>  fair-queue 64 256 0
>  no cdp enable
> !
> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial0/0
> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial0/1
>
> Mike Barnard wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a scenario that i need some assistance and insight as well.
>
> I have two E1 links, terminating on two separate routers, each from a
> different ISP. My current problem is that both links do have moments
 of
> unexplained blackouts.
>
> I would like to terminate both these links onto one router and do
 some
> load-balancing and fail-over on them. CISCO's OER seems like the
 thing that
> will work this out, though in what i have read, this needs at least
 (in my
> understanding) two routers. The example given in CISCO's OER manual
 for
> deployment on one router depicts two border routers, one acting as
 the
> Master Controller/Border Router, and the other the Rorder Router
>
> Has anyone played around with OER and is there a possibility of
 getting it
> to work on one router with two serial interfaces, one loopback and
> one ethernet interface?
>
> Is there any other way to load-balance (and have a failover
 provision) on
> a CISCO 1700 router? I would have done IP CEF per-packet load
 balancing but
> i have no control over the end and this wont scale well with any link
> failure.
>
> Appreciate any assistance.
>
> Regards
>
> --
> Mike
>
> Of course, you might discount this possibility, but remember that one
 in
> a million chances happen 99% of the time.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> afnog mailing list
> http://afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afnog
>
>


-- 
Mike

Of course, you might discount this possibility, but remember that one
 in
a million chances happen 99% of the time.
------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
 http://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/attachments/20071015/817dc22a/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:42:49 +0300
From: Raymond Macharia <raymond at accesskenya.com>
Subject: Re: [afnog] Load Balancing Two ISP links
To: Mike Barnard <mike.barnardq at gmail.com>
Cc: afnog at afnog.org
Message-ID: <47135239.8010308 at accesskenya.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Hi Mike,
do you have a snap shot of sh int or show controller for your E1 that 
goes down, I think the first step would be to remove that gremlin 
otherwise if it keeps going down often no solution will really be of 
help as it will result in unstable routes.

Regards


Raymond

Mike Barnard wrote:
> Hi Raymond, this is interesting. it does solve the redundancy part, 
> but doesn't address the load-balancing aspect of the two links. the 
> current problem that im facing is that any one of the two E1's 
> unexplainable goes dead and there is a tendency for one pipe to fill 
> up while the other is almost not utilised.
>
> that is why i was looking at something that can handle both
 redundancy 
> as well as load-balance, using the existing hardware and software.
>
> If all fails, ill play around with this and see how well it will 
> scale. I could try backup load 50 5 at least that ensures that the 
> primary link hits 50%, it brings in the second link and when it falls
 
> below 5% it shuts down the secondary link...
>
> Thanks
>
> On 10/15/07, *Raymond Macharia* <raymond at accesskenya.com 
> <mailto:raymond at accesskenya.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Mike,
>     I currently use BGP to achieve what you are trying to do however
>     if that seems complicated there is a simple command I used some
>     years back and it worked well for me, below is a template.
>     The lines of interest are the ones that start with the word
>     backup. What the first line did is provide redundancy so when
 this
>     link went down traffic would be redirected to the other link.
>     The second line is for load sharing and this means that if the
>     first link gets to 80% it invokes the second link and if the link
>     goes down to 60% it shuts down the second link.
>     You can play around with the percentages to get the right mix for
>     you. Note that you still have the two defaults to the two links
 below.
>
>
>     interface Serial0/0
>      description Internet Link1
>      bandwidth 1024
>     * backup interface Serial0/1
>      backup load 80 60*
>      ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.252 <http://255.255.255.252>
>      no ip redirects
>      no ip directed-broadcast
>      no ip proxy-arp
>      ip nat outside
>      encapsulation ppp
>      no cdp enable
>     !
>     interface Serial0/1
>      description Internet Link2
>      bandwidth 512
>      ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.252 <http://255.255.255.252>
>      no ip redirects
>      no ip directed-broadcast
>      no ip proxy-arp
>      encapsulation ppp
>      fair-queue 64 256 0
>      no cdp enable
>     !
>     ip route 0.0.0.0 <http://0.0.0.0> 0.0.0.0 <http://0.0.0.0>
 Serial0/0
>     ip route 0.0.0.0 <http://0.0.0.0> 0.0.0.0 <http://0.0.0.0>
 Serial0/1
>
>     Mike Barnard wrote:
>>     Hi,
>>      
>>     I have a scenario that i need some assistance and insight as
 well.
>>      
>>     I have two E1 links, terminating on two separate routers, each
>>     from a different ISP. My current problem is that both links do
>>     have moments of unexplained blackouts.
>>      
>>     I would like to terminate both these links onto one router and
 do
>>     some load-balancing and fail-over on them. CISCO's OER seems
 like
>>     the thing that will work this out, though in what i have read,
>>     this needs at least (in my understanding) two routers. The
>>     example given in CISCO's OER manual for deployment on one router
>>     depicts two border routers, one acting as the Master
>>     Controller/Border Router, and the other the Rorder Router
>>      
>>     Has anyone played around with OER and is there a possibility of
>>     getting it to work on one router with two serial interfaces, one
>>     loopback and one ethernet interface?
>>      
>>     Is there any other way to load-balance (and have a failover
>>     provision) on a CISCO 1700 router? I would have done IP CEF
>>     per-packet load balancing but i have no control over the end and
>>     this wont scale well with any link failure.
>>      
>>     Appreciate any assistance.
>>      
>>     Regards
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Mike
>>
>>     Of course, you might discount this possibility, but remember
 that
>>     one in
>>     a million chances happen 99% of the time.
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------
>>    
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     afnog mailing list
>>
>>     http://afnog.org/mailman/listinfo/afnog
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Mike
>
> Of course, you might discount this possibility, but remember that one
 in
> a million chances happen 99% of the time.
> ------------------------------------------------------------ 



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
afnog mailing list

End of afnog Digest, Vol 43, Issue 17
*************************************




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



More information about the afnog mailing list