03-24-2007 01:18 AM - edited 03-03-2019 04:17 PM
Hello,
I am having a hard time with policy routing.
There is a 1841 router having 2 WAN connections (aDSL), each with different ISP.
What I am trying to do originate traffic from each fastethernet to different dialer an vice versa.
Let's say di0<->fa0/0 & di1<->fa0/1.
Imagine two different LANs, each using its own WAN connection.
Till now I have:
interface FastEthernet0/1
ip address x.y.z.a 255.255.255.248
ip policy route-map ROUTEMAPNAME
access-list 101 permit ip x.y.z.0 0.0.0.7 any
route-map ROUTEMAPNAME permit 1
match ip address 101
set interface dialer1
Thanks in advance
Solved! Go to Solution.
03-24-2007 10:38 AM
Stavros
It seems to me that your Policy Based Routing should work with either set interface or set next-hop.
If you want to direct all traffic coming into fa0/0 to go to dialer 0, all traffic coming into fa0/1 to go to dialer 1, all traffic coming into dialer 0 to go to fa0/0 and all traffic coming into dialer 1 to go to fa0/1 then you will need ip policy configured on all 4 interfaces.
While the parts of config that you posted look ok, you have not indicated whether that part is working or not. Perhaps you can clarify.
I would also like to ask a clarifying question: is it possible that a packet could arrive at dialer1 with a destination address on fa0/0? If that did happen what would you do? Your statement of requirements seems to indicate that you would forward it to fa0/1 anyway. Is this an accurate statement of requirements?
There was a discussion in NetPro a while back about something similar to this situation and suggestion made that perhaps VRF lite might be a way to get the results that you want - almost like 2 separate routers in the same box. Perhaps you can think about this alternative.
HTH
Rick
03-24-2007 02:28 AM
Friend,
Let me know if i understand your requirement here.
You want the traffic from Fa0/1 to exit via Dialer1 and fa 0/0 via dialer0
You should better use the next hop ips in this case.
Configure 2 LAN pools corresponding to the LAN pool.
USe route-maps and instead of set interface use set ip next-hop of the dialer interfaces.
Narayan
03-24-2007 10:15 AM
I need all traffic originating behind fa0/1 to be routed via dialer1, as well as all inbound traffic to dialer1 to be forwarded to fa0/1.
As if there are 2 routers (di0-fa0/0 & di1-fa0/1).
03-24-2007 10:38 AM
Stavros
It seems to me that your Policy Based Routing should work with either set interface or set next-hop.
If you want to direct all traffic coming into fa0/0 to go to dialer 0, all traffic coming into fa0/1 to go to dialer 1, all traffic coming into dialer 0 to go to fa0/0 and all traffic coming into dialer 1 to go to fa0/1 then you will need ip policy configured on all 4 interfaces.
While the parts of config that you posted look ok, you have not indicated whether that part is working or not. Perhaps you can clarify.
I would also like to ask a clarifying question: is it possible that a packet could arrive at dialer1 with a destination address on fa0/0? If that did happen what would you do? Your statement of requirements seems to indicate that you would forward it to fa0/1 anyway. Is this an accurate statement of requirements?
There was a discussion in NetPro a while back about something similar to this situation and suggestion made that perhaps VRF lite might be a way to get the results that you want - almost like 2 separate routers in the same box. Perhaps you can think about this alternative.
HTH
Rick
03-24-2007 12:12 PM
Of course!!! On all interfaces, as well as remove the default route (this is what I was missing!)
Thank you, your post "unstuck" me!
Regards,
Stavros
03-24-2007 12:59 PM
Stavros
I am glad that my post was able to help you to find the solution to your issue. And thanks for the rating. The forum is a very helpful place to discuss problems and to find solutions. I encourage you to continue your participation in the forum.
HTH
Rick
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: