Performance Routing (PfR) Questions

huangedmc · ‎02-20-2010

Was reading PfR on a cisco site, and it says:

In the current implementation of OER, external BGP or static routes can serve as parent routes with external interfaces being point-to-point or multipoint interfaces (Ethernet) with a single next hop. In other words, multipoint GRE interfaces (as with a DMVPN configuration) that has multiple next hops reachable from the mGRE interface are not supported. Additionally, Ethernet interfaces with multiple next hops, which is a common BGP peering deployment topology, is not currently supported.

...

Up to 10 border routers and a total of 20 external interfaces are supported per master controller.

====

We have WAN facing ethernet interfaces.

Is PfR going to work on these routers or no?

Our WAN interfaces are configured w/ a typical /30 mask, w/ one next hop towards the ISP.

So in theory that's considered single next hop, even though it's on a multi-access medium?

Also, the limit seems to be 10 BR's per MC.

Does that mean if we have 100 remote locations, each w/ two routers, we'd need to have a cluster of 20 (100*2/10)dedicated routers to serve as master controllers?

That doesn't seem very scalable to me.

Is anyone actually doing this on your production network?

How is it working for you?

huangedmc · ‎02-22-2010

Anyone??

Steve Lyons · ‎12-08-2010

Hello,

Please see inline:

We have WAN facing ethernet interfaces.

Is PfR going to work on these routers or no? PfR is positioned for ISR routers, 7200/7301 routers, 6500, 7600, and ASRs.

Our WAN interfaces are configured w/ a typical /30 mask, w/ one next hop towards the ISP.

So in theory that's considered single next hop, even though it's on a multi-access medium? PfR requires that only one next hop per interface is known in the routing table for destination prefixes.

Also, the limit seems to be 10 BR's per MC.

Does that mean if we have 100 remote locations, each w/ two routers, we'd need to have a cluster of 20 (100*2/10)dedicated routers to serve as master controllers?

That doesn't seem very scalable to me. Most deployment scenarios consist of 1 Master Controller and 2-4 Border Routers per location. If there is a design requirement which requires addition support for Border Routers per Master Controller I would recommend contacting your Cisco Account team to submit a feature enhancement request.

Is anyone actually doing this on your production network? I work in TAC and I see many configuration assistance cases for PfR.

How is it working for you? PfR is able to route traffic based on application requirements like throughput, delay, jitter, loss, MOS, and reachability.

If you have further questions let me know.

Best Regards,

Steve Lyons - Cisco