Ethernet Switches & Routers

Reply
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 19
Registered: ‎07-13-2011

Redundant Link

Hi!

Which redundancy solution is the best for two routers that connected to each other over two wireless links?  Also I need to use load balancing between these two routers. But I don't want to use STP.

Thanks

m.kazemi

Contributor
Posts: 61
Registered: ‎12-08-2009

Re: Redundant Link

Which device and version code are you using? I would suggest IP load sharing. Please check attached document.
You can find more details reading the manuel.

Frequent Contributor
Posts: 117
Registered: ‎07-26-2010

Re: Redundant Link

Hi.

Do you need to have L2 switched interconnects or could it be L3 routed?

Are your wireless links L2 transparent and able to transport .1Q VLAN tagged packets?

L2:     Link aggregation with LACP via the two transparent wireless links

L3.     two IP transfer networks and OSPF and IP loadsharing (ECMP)

regards

Karl

Occasional Contributor
Posts: 19
Registered: ‎07-13-2011

Re: Redundant Link

Hi serhat.kahraman and karl

Thank you for replay.I think is better to use IP load sharing. I have FESX full layer 3 series and the software version is  04.1.00aT3e3.I use rip v2 routing protocols.

Best Regards

m.kazemi

Occasional Contributor
Posts: 19
Registered: ‎07-13-2011

Re: Redundant Link

Hi serhat.kahraman and karl

There are some questions, I use dynamic routing between our routers and there is one ve with two ports for wireless link but in IP load sharing we should use static route, How can I configure IP load sharing in this case without changing dynamic routing protocols.

Best regards

m.kazemi

Frequent Contributor
Posts: 117
Registered: ‎07-26-2010

Re: Redundant Link

Hi.

For IP load sharing via routed connections you need two routes with the same costs between your routers.

Manual:

If the IP route table contains more than one path to a destination and the paths each have the lowest cost, then the Layer 3 Switch

uses IP load sharing to select a path to the destination.

The term “path” refers to the next-hop router to a destination, not to the entire route to a destination.

Thus, when the software compares multiple equal-cost paths, the software is comparing paths that use different

next-hop routers, with equal costs, to the same destination.

I would suggest:

                 |------- VE x  --------wlan link 1--------- VE x ------|

Router 1 ---                                                                   --- Router 2

                 |--------VE y ---------wlan link 2--------- VE y ------|

Therefore the routers should have two routes with equal costs in their routing table and should use IP load sharing.

What about using OSPF?

regards

Karl

Occasional Contributor
Posts: 19
Registered: ‎07-13-2011

Re: Redundant Link

Hi karl

Thank you for explanation and because of some router that is base layer three in this case I prefer to use rip routing protocols. But generally I enjoy work with OSPF routing protocol. It’s very better than rip. What’s your opinion about this matter especially in brocade equipments?

Best regards

m.kazemi  

Join the Community

Get quick and easy access to valuable resource designed to help you manage your Brocade Network.

vADC is now Pulse Secure
Download FREE NVMe eBook