Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of cfan73
cfan73

asked on

WAN design (dual WAN providers, MPLS, BGP multi-homing)

The customer is wanting to convert to a new WAN architecture that will provide a dual/redundant carrier architecture.

Specifically, they currently have a single MPLS carrier between all of their locations, each site having two circuits into the carrier cloud (single MPLS VLAN, not dual/separate). As they route via BGP to the carrier, each site has a single BGP ASN. The WAN routers perform re-distribution so they do not currently run iBGP between the two carrier CE routers.

The newly proposed architecture is to have a single circuit from the current carrier and another from a new carrier into each site, with each circuit terminated on individual/separate routers. To ensure session load balancing, bandwidth utilization, cost routing, etc., they're hoping for consulting experience/expertise to provide design input.

Stated options/questions include:

- whether to run iBGP between WAN routers and what impact the AS numbering may have
- the most effective (yet simplest) way to run performance routing code, etc that they need to understand how best to run the new WAN architecture
- cutover/migration plans/advice

So, we're looking for examples from similar designs - dual MPLS clouds with divergent carriers and how to design around problems.
 
Very broad, I know, but any/all input that can be provided would be appreciated.  As always, reference links/docs are appreciated.
SOLUTION
Avatar of pergr
pergr

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
Avatar of cfan73
cfan73

ASKER

Thanks for your feedback - will consider, but keeping this thread open for additional input (hopefully addressing the original requirements along with your suggestions).
If you are using OSPF then another option is to use OSPF sham links across the VPN.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial
Avatar of cfan73

ASKER

I've requested that this question be closed as follows:

Accepted answer: 0 points for cfan73's comment #a38445956

for the following reason:

Internal team developed the recommended solution
You may have chosen a different design, for what ever internal reasons, but there is nothing wrong with the options I provided.

I find it rather cheap not assigning the points.
Avatar of cfan73

ASKER

Internal team developed the recommended solution -

I certainly wasn't trying to be "cheap" in accepting my own answer, so not sure about that comment. What I wasn't aware of was the ability to accept your own answer yet still award points to others for valuable input.  I've corrected that here, awarded points, and will follow this process moving forward.

Thanks, all.