|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
From: "Scott Berkman" <scott@sberkman.net> To: "'rodrick brown'" <rodrick.brown@gmail.com>, <nanog@nanog.org> In-Reply-To: <D774B787-4A89-4104-BF85-6750D73D1457@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 03:45:21 -0500 Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org Anycast? http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog29/abstracts.php?pt=NjcxJm5hbm9nMjk=&nm=n anog29 Might need to know a little more about the layout here for a better answer. -Scott -----Original Message----- From: rodrick brown [mailto:rodrick.brown@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 7:47 PM To: nanog@nanog.org list Subject: Routing to multiple uplinks This may be slightly off topic however I have a very unique situation where I need to provide two diverse paths to a major stock exchange. Each host may either use route A or B for any given reason to access this particular exchange using two distinct routers and target address. The applicatiOn running on these hosts must only see/use one target address this needs to be transparent as possible. NIC bonding/teaming on the host side isn't a viable solution because of the latency overhead same goes for vrrp/hsrp. I believe my only option here is to setup multiple default routes with a preferred path of some sort. This seems to be possible using ip route2 on Linux. This just seems wrong on many levels and I thought I would post here because I know there is something obvious I'm missing. Please clue me in. Thanks. Sent from my iPhone 3GS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |