mailing list archives
RE: Multiple ISP Load Balancing
From: Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura () ericsson com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 14:38:10 -0500
You might want to take a look at work happening in ALTO (http://tools.ietf.org/wg/alto/)
From: Holmes,David A [mailto:dholmes () mwdh2o com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 11:07 AM
To: nanog () nanog org
Subject: Multiple ISP Load Balancing
From time to time some have posted questions asking if BGP load balancers such as the old Routescience Pathcontrol
device are still around, and if not what have others found to replace that function. I have used the Routescience
device with much success 10 years ago when it first came on the market, but since then a full BGP feed has become much
larger, Routescience has been bought by Avaya, then discontinued, and other competitors such as Sockeye, Netvmg have
been acquired by other companies.
Doing some research on how load balancing can be accomplished in 2011, I have come across Cisco's performance routing
feature, and features from load balancing companies such as F5's Link Controller. I have always found BGP to be easy to
work with, and an elegant, simple solution to load balancing using a route-reflector configuration in which one BGP
client (Routescience Pathcontrol in my background) learns the best route to destination networks, and then announces
that best route to BGP border routers using common and widely understood BGP concepts such as communities and local
pref, and found this to lead to a deterministic Internet routing architecture. This required a knowledge only of IETF
standards (common BGP concepts and configurations), required no specialized scripting, or any other knowledge lying
outside IETF boundaries, and it seemed reasonable to expect that network engineers should eagerly and enthusiastically
want to master this technology, just as any other technology must be mastered to run high availability networks.
So I am wondering if anyone has experience with implementing load balancing across multiple ISP links in 2011, and if
there have been any comparisons between IETF standards-based methods using BGP, and other proprietary methods which may
use a particular vendor's approach to solving the same problem, but involves some complexity with more variables to be
plugged in to the architecture.
This communication, together with any attachments or embedded links, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return
e-mail message and delete the original and all copies of the communication, along with any attachments or embedded
links, from your system.