Re: Cisco access list - multihomed question

[Brian Longwe <blongwe at psg.com>]

Thanks for the response Barry....

Is it only implementable(sic) in CEF? I am not using CEF at the moment because when I enable it, the router seem to go into too many cpu cycles and my wccp sessions drop, killing browsing for my customers....

Thanks,

Brian

On Sun, 28 Oct 2001 08:04:17 -0800
"Barry Raveendran Greene" <bgreene at cisco.com> wrote:

> Hello Brian,
> 
> Rephrasing - you want packets with a source address x.y.z.0/25 to bypass the
> forward table (FIB) and be forwarded in a direction of you choice.
> 
> So what you are looking for is a "FIB bypass" feature. On the Cisco (where
> is was first created) it is called Policy Based Routing (PBR).
> 
> There is a lab on PBR in the ISP Workshop materials
> (http://www.cisco.com/public/cons/workshops/) and found via key word
> searching on Cisco's web site. Note that in the middle of 12.0 we made PBR a
> CEF feature - allowing it to handle more PPS and not be process switched. So
> check the documentation for any specific details.
> 
> Also note that this will only take care of traffic being forwarded upstream
> to the provider. It will not handle downstream traffic. For downstream
> flows, tweaking BGP advertisements would be you best option.
> 
> Barry
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-afnog at uol.co.ug [mailto:owner-afnog at uol.co.ug]On Behalf Of
> > Brian Longwe
> > Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 8:18 AM
> > To: afnog at afnog.org
> > Subject: Cisco access list - multihomed question
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The scenario.
> >
> > - Two upstream circuits on the same border router
> > - I want to use one to carry (outgoing) traffic for certain
> > customer networks only
> > - I want to use the other as the standard default for all other
> > customer traffic
> >
> >
> >
> >    Upst #1 s0/0     [---------]
> > --------------------[         ]< Upst #1 should route traffic for
> > x.y.z.0/25
> >                     [         ]
> > --------------------[         ]
> >    Upst #2 s1/0:16  [---------]< Upst #2 should route traffic for
> > all others
> >
> > - Both upstream connections go to the same provider
> > - There is no BGP with upstream provider, only static defaults (until now)
> >
> > Instinctively I want to define route-maps to block traffic for #2
> > from #1 and block traffic for #1 from #2 with a "next-hop"
> > statement to redirect in each route-map.
> >
> > Is this the right logic? Anyone with similar experience who can give tips?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian Longwe
> >
> > -----
> > This is the afnog mailing list, managed by Majordomo 1.94.4
> >
> > To send a message to this list, e-mail afnog at afnog.org
> > To send a request to majordomo, e-mail majordomo at afnog.org and put
> > your request in the body of the message (i.e use "help" for help)
> >
> > This list is maintained by owner-afnog at afnog.org
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -----
> This is the afnog mailing list, managed by Majordomo 1.94.4
> 
> To send a message to this list, e-mail afnog at afnog.org
> To send a request to majordomo, e-mail majordomo at afnog.org and put
> your request in the body of the message (i.e use "help" for help)
> 
> This list is maintained by owner-afnog at afnog.org
> 
> 

-----
This is the afnog mailing list, managed by Majordomo 1.94.4

To send a message to this list, e-mail afnog at afnog.org
To send a request to majordomo, e-mail majordomo at afnog.org and put
your request in the body of the message (i.e use "help" for help)

This list is maintained by owner-afnog at afnog.org