SysAdmin magazine (www.samag.com) ran an excellent article on how to accomplish the same task Linux ("Redundant Internet Connections Using Linux", Jan 2002).
As the article details, this can be done with a recycled old workstation - you don't need a server with a 4-figure price tag to do this.
It's cheaper than a Cisco 3600 router and very easy to set up. In addition, I believe it doesn't use BGP. Furthermore, the 2.4 series of Linux kernels provide excellent stateful firewalling capabilities (IPTables).
Granted, there are situations where this article's solution is best, such as large corporations. But for a SMB just looking for a redundant Internet connection setup, the soution in SysAdmin magazine is probably better.
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
I would have to agree with you on this 100 %.
I work with small companies in general I try not to spend their money especially when they are trying to grow. Don’t get me wrong Cisco is great if you need traffic control on the 4 layers of theOSI model. I know Cisco was the example, but I think I am inclined to lean more toward the Linux side of the solution for the SBM.
RRG A+, MCP for windows 2000 professional certified
I work with small companies in general I try not to spend their money especially when they are trying to grow. Don’t get me wrong Cisco is great if you need traffic control on the 4 layers of theOSI model. I know Cisco was the example, but I think I am inclined to lean more toward the Linux side of the solution for the SBM.
RRG A+, MCP for windows 2000 professional certified
I would find it hard to recommend a PC based solution for a service as integral to business operations as internet connectivity.
Routers are the appliances for this task and as such are optimised, both software and hardware, to handle these operations.
A PC maybe the cheaper option when it comes to hardware, but when it comes to the support and maintenance cost the far exceed the food & water for an appliance. When was the last time a Cisco had a hard drive failure?
Anyway, BGP, with the addition of weighting we have managed to provide redundancy while still favouring our primary service provider. So cheaper, though maybe less reliable, providers can be exploited while maintaining more reliable links as backup.
Routers are the appliances for this task and as such are optimised, both software and hardware, to handle these operations.
A PC maybe the cheaper option when it comes to hardware, but when it comes to the support and maintenance cost the far exceed the food & water for an appliance. When was the last time a Cisco had a hard drive failure?
Anyway, BGP, with the addition of weighting we have managed to provide redundancy while still favouring our primary service provider. So cheaper, though maybe less reliable, providers can be exploited while maintaining more reliable links as backup.
The Linux solution I discussed was for SMBs, where in addition to more stringent cost requirements, more functions are likely to be integrated into fewer devices.
The Linux machine could serve not only as the router, but as a firewall and a web proxy (such as we have at my company).
As for hard drive failures, that's why RAID was developed. And by the way, what about insecure, clear-text protocols like Telnet and FTP (which Cisco routers use to manage their configurations)?
As I said in my comments, there are situations (such as large businesses) where buying dedicated routers does makes more sense. However, there are also situations (especially for SMBs) where using a Linux machine for this function would be the better solution.
The Linux machine could serve not only as the router, but as a firewall and a web proxy (such as we have at my company).
As for hard drive failures, that's why RAID was developed. And by the way, what about insecure, clear-text protocols like Telnet and FTP (which Cisco routers use to manage their configurations)?
As I said in my comments, there are situations (such as large businesses) where buying dedicated routers does makes more sense. However, there are also situations (especially for SMBs) where using a Linux machine for this function would be the better solution.
Are the neighbor IP's valid? Even for loop-back interface?
Is the AS number valid? As I remember, the largest AS# is 65535.
neighbor 456.456.456.456 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 789.789.789.789 remote-as 88888 ! Backup ISP AS Number
Is the AS number valid? As I remember, the largest AS# is 65535.
neighbor 456.456.456.456 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 789.789.789.789 remote-as 88888 ! Backup ISP AS Number
The neighbor AS Numbers and IP addresses of Neighbors were used only as an example. You are correct, they are illegal values. This was done intentionally.
Thanks for your post!
David Davis
daviddavis@inetworkdata.com
Thanks for your post!
David Davis
daviddavis@inetworkdata.com
same quistion sir coz i would like to know whatb is the procedure of bgp
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
