nanog mailing list archives
RE: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss.
From: Phil Bedard <bedard.phil () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 15:54:24 -0700
I'm having a discussion with a small network in a part of the world where bandwidth is scarce and multiple DSL lines are often used for upstream links. The topic is policy-based routing, which is being described as "load balancing" where end-user traffic is assigned to a line according to source address. In my opinion the main problems with this are: - It's brittle, when a line fails, traffic doesn't re-route - None of the usual debugging tools work properly - Adding a new user is complicated because it has to be done in (at least) two places But I'm having a distinct lack of success locating rants and diatribes or even well-reasoned articles supporting this opinion. Am I out to lunch? -w -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss., (continued)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Christopher Morrow (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Stuart Sheldon (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jay Ashworth (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Fred Reimer (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. John Kristoff (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Leo Bicknell (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jimmy Hess (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Octavio Alvarez (Oct 12)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jimmy Hess (Oct 12)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. John Osmon (Oct 12)
- RE: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Phil Bedard (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Bruce Pinsky (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Jeff Kell (Oct 11)
- Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss. Bruce Pinsky (Oct 11)