02-19-2008 08:06 AM - edited 03-03-2019 08:46 PM
Hi, I have 2 T1s going to different ISPs. I want to direct my workstation subnet for http and ftp traffic to go out to one of the T1s. I just want to segregate users' web and ftp traffic from the server traffic going out to other ISP. I also want the users traffic have the ability to go out to other branches, which is the 10.x.x.x networks. I have route maps configured but all of the sudden the user T1 is bottlenecked, it is very slow. I used other t1 before for both server and workstation and it was faster then now with the segregation. Can route maps slow down the processing that much?
here are my route maps. Any help is greatly appriciate it. Thanks
access-list 102 permit tcp 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 any eq www
access-list 102 permit tcp 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 any eq 443
access-list 102 permit tcp 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 any eq ftp
access-list 102 permit tcp 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 any eq ftp-data
access-list 102 permit ip 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 any
access-list 105 permit ip 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 105 permit ip 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 172.22.19.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 106 permit ip 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 10.1.0.0 0.0.255.255
access-list 106 permit ip 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 172.24.1.0 0.0.0.255
route-map UserInternet permit 7
match ip address 105
set ip next-hop 10.0.0.2
!
route-map UserInternet permit 8
match ip address 106
set ip next-hop 10.0.1.1
!
route-map UserInternet permit 9
match ip address 102
set ip next-hop 69.x.x.x
!
Solved! Go to Solution.
02-19-2008 08:35 AM
Bart
I would not think that route maps (or more specifically the use of Policy Based Routing - which is what you have configured) would slow down the T1 in the way that you describe. I believe that you need to look for some other issue affecting the T1.
The PBR that you have configured seems pretty straightforward. I will note that if you have this configured in access list 102:
access-list 102 permit ip 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 any
then you really do not need any of the other statements in access list 102 since this line includes all of what the other lines would permit.
HTH
Rick
02-19-2008 08:35 AM
Bart
I would not think that route maps (or more specifically the use of Policy Based Routing - which is what you have configured) would slow down the T1 in the way that you describe. I believe that you need to look for some other issue affecting the T1.
The PBR that you have configured seems pretty straightforward. I will note that if you have this configured in access list 102:
access-list 102 permit ip 172.23.0.0 0.0.255.255 any
then you really do not need any of the other statements in access list 102 since this line includes all of what the other lines would permit.
HTH
Rick
02-19-2008 10:56 AM
Bart
I am glad that my answer was helpful. Thank you for using the rating system to indicate that your question was resolved (and thanks for the rating). It makes the forum more useful when people can read a question and can know that they will read a response which did successfully resolve the question.
The forum is an excellent place to learn about Cisco networking. I encourage you to continue your participation in the forum.
HTH
Rick
02-19-2008 11:40 AM
Thanks for yuor help. I learned a lot from this site, particularly from you as you answered several of my questions from the past. Thanks again.
02-19-2008 04:53 PM
I agree with Rick, I wouldn't think such a simple PBR would impact your performance, but something that's overlooked is there a policy cache that can be applied to interfaces when using PBR. Although I believe, it doesn't offer any benefit when using CEF.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide