This would depend on your specific needs. BGP is not needed, again depending on what you need. Simply two equal cost static routes to 0.0.0.0 pointing at each of your Service providers might do what you need for outbound load sharing. Inbound would have a lot to do with how your providers advertise your address space out to the internet core.
Depending on your load balancing methods (Fast Switching / Cef / Cef per packet, etc) you may vary how you send your packets. Per destination (with Fast Switching for example) will go per destination. So you'd not go per packet. Process switching and cef per-packet allows for per packet load sharing. The biggest down fall to not getting specific routes in through your ISP's is sub-optimal routing or asymetric routing. Neither of which will cause failure. Can cause out of order packets which can cause problems with some applications. All your packets should be able to make it to your destination even if you did per-packet, but out of order packets can occur.
I tried to do this with 2 T1's using Route Maps, My problem is I didn't want to use BGP, although I wanted to have 1-1 static nat translations with 2 nat pools.
Meaning you could come in from the outside hitting my 192.168.1.1 via 2 different 2 providers, 2 different IP's. I could not get that to work, that beeing said, if you are just worried about traffic going out and not worried about it comming in.
You can create 2 nat pools and use route maps and weighted routes, and I even managed to get it work. The only catch, is its a pool, not a 1-1 translation.
If you a do a search on the subject "Complicated Nat" you should see a few posts on it in this news group.
The problem you're most likely having is that you're getting into issues with assymetrical routing going out. If you have two exit points, say one with the translation from your 192.168.1.1 address to 10.1.1.1, and the other translating your 192.168.1.1 to 10.2.2.2, what's going to happen is this: Someone outside starts a session to 10.1.1.1. Suppose the loadsharing is such that the outbound side of this connection goes through the other connection, which means the source address of the outbound packets gets translated to 10.2.2.2. The session will fail.
BGP isn't really going to help in this situation, since optimum routing isn't the problem symmetrical routing is. There's no way to know which inbound connection traffic from any given source is going to come in on, no matter what your local routing tables say, so you can always have assymterical routing.
Hi everyone, I would like to thank you in advance for any help you can provide a newcomer like myself!
Im studying the 100-105 book by Odom and am currently on the topic of Port security. I purchased a used 2960 and I'm trying to follow a...
While deploying a number of 18xx/2802/3802 model access points (APs), which run AP-COS as their operating platform. It can be observed on some occasions that while many of their access points were able to join the fabric WLC withou...
I am going to design and build an LAN network under a tunnel underground with long distance between the switches.
I will have 2 Catalyst switches and 8 Industrial IE3000, and they will be connected with fiber.
For now I am planning on use Layer-2 s...