Mailing List Archive

L2TP tunnel persistence and routing
Hi,



We have 2 x 7200's terminating VPDN DSL traffic.

Each router has a Gig fibre link to providers switching infrastructure
and have an eBGP peering, both announcing PoP space.



In order to create tunnels, providers net depends on BGP to reach our
tunnel endpoints, one on each box. Due to current BGP announcements,
this means tunnels for both boxes arrive on the first box. L2TP traffic
destined to be terminated on second box travels over internal gig link.



We want to change this either via statics being implemented by Provider
or using BGP /32 announcements for our Loopback.



Would such diversion of L2TP traffic bound for second box bring down the
tunnels i.e users ?



Any thoughts appreciated.



Thanks,

Mark
RE: L2TP tunnel persistence and routing [ In reply to ]
Mark Tohill <> wrote on Friday, February 10, 2006 12:34 PM:

>
> We have 2 x 7200's terminating VPDN DSL traffic.
>
> Each router has a Gig fibre link to providers switching
> infrastructure and have an eBGP peering, both announcing PoP space.
>
> In order to create tunnels, providers net depends on BGP to reach our
> tunnel endpoints, one on each box. Due to current BGP announcements,
> this means tunnels for both boxes arrive on the first box. L2TP
> traffic destined to be terminated on second box travels over internal
> gig link.
>
> We want to change this either via statics being implemented by
> Provider or using BGP /32 announcements for our Loopback.
>
> Would such diversion of L2TP traffic bound for second box bring down
> the tunnels i.e users ?

No, it should not affect the established tunnels, the packets will just
re-route along the more-specific route.
If the provider agrees, I would do this dynamically by announcing /32,
they will then likely tag them with no-export so the announcements stay
local to their AS.

oli

_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
RE: L2TP tunnel persistence and routing [ In reply to ]
Thanks Oliver.

This is exactly what we done and its working well.

I did however manage to bring down the router by putting a debug
condition on internal interface and a debug vpdn l2x-packets to try and
prove l2tp traffic no longer traveling over that link.

I'll learn....

Thanks again,
Mark



-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:oboehmer@cisco.com]
Sent: 10 February 2006 11:51
To: Mark Tohill; cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-bba] L2TP tunnel persistence and routing

Mark Tohill <> wrote on Friday, February 10, 2006 12:34 PM:

>
> We have 2 x 7200's terminating VPDN DSL traffic.
>
> Each router has a Gig fibre link to providers switching
> infrastructure and have an eBGP peering, both announcing PoP space.
>
> In order to create tunnels, providers net depends on BGP to reach our
> tunnel endpoints, one on each box. Due to current BGP announcements,
> this means tunnels for both boxes arrive on the first box. L2TP
> traffic destined to be terminated on second box travels over internal
> gig link.
>
> We want to change this either via statics being implemented by
> Provider or using BGP /32 announcements for our Loopback.
>
> Would such diversion of L2TP traffic bound for second box bring down
> the tunnels i.e users ?

No, it should not affect the established tunnels, the packets will just
re-route along the more-specific route.
If the provider agrees, I would do this dynamically by announcing /32,
they will then likely tag them with no-export so the announcements stay
local to their AS.

oli

_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba