[126760] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Junos Asymmetric Routing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Larry Sheldon)
Fri May 28 12:14:58 2010
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 11:14:33 -0500
From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikhAle75k-WwtvBqtBreGm01vQwSYscBpG8IfuW@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 5/28/2010 07:37, Mark Hermsdorfer wrote:
> Having said that, If the JunOS based SRX platform does not do session
> tracking in the same was as the SSG platform it would seem that the most
> reasonable solution would be to NAT the traffic as has already been pointed
> out.
Gonna really highlight my ignorance here, but....
Given the terminology (primary" and "secondary" or "standby" (I forget
the exact terms used) in the OP, is it true that traffic arriving on the
secondary when the primary is up is a bad thing?
Given that to be true, is there no way in BGP to make the secondary look
poorer than the primary?
Or something.
--
Somebody should have said:
A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.
Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting
the vote.
Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca
ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
