Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: BGPttH. Neustar can do it, why can't we?
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 08:11:12 -0700

In a message written on Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 10:05:30AM -0500, Chris Boyd wrote:
Speaking as someone who does a lot of work supporting small business IT, I suspect the number is much lower.  As a 
group, these customers tend to be extremely cost averse.  Paying for a secondary access circuit may become important 
as cloud applications become more critical for the market segment, but existing smart NAT boxes that detect primary 
upstream failure and switch over to a secondary ISP will work for many cases.  Yes, it's ugly, but it gets them 
reconnected to the off-site email server and the payment card gateway.

I don't even think the dual-uplink NAT box is that ugly of a solution.
Sure it's outbound only, but for a lot of applications that's fine.

However, it causes me to ask a differnet question, how will this
work in IPv6?  Does anyone make a dual-uplink IPv6 aware device?
Ideally it would use DHCP-PD to get prefixes from two upstream
providers and would make both available on the local LAN.  Conceptually
it would then be easy to policy route traffic to the correct provider.
But of course the problem comes down to the host, it now needs to
know how to switch between source addresses in some meaningful way,
and the router needs to be able to signal it.

As messy as IPv4 NAT is, it seems like a case where IPv6 NAT might
be a relatively clean solution.  Are there other deployable, or nearly
deployable solutions?

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/

Attachment: _bin
Description:


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]