[AusNOG] High availability options for terminating point-to-point Ethernet (on Cisco CE)

[Sam Silvester]

Doesn't give you a specific answer so apologies if not useful to your
situation but in past teams I've seen the following kind of things done.

- We matched the customer SLA to the 'lowest common denominator' of the
access link, or the aggregation router (generally we had 24x7x4 hour
hardware replacement, so we doubled that to give time to install and
reconfigure e.g. 8 hours restoration ETA). Often there was a switching
layer between the assorted backhaul providers and the aggregation PE so the
option also existed to re-provision customers but that was never really
something we planned to do.

- We ran multiple boxes, so we spread the impact of hardware outages (and
upgrades). If a customer wanted higher availability, we provisioned them
two links on two different aggregation boxes and ran HSRP or BGP sessions
with them.

Single boxes failing wasn't something that kept me up at night to be
honest, it's empirical but we had more failures with backhaul providers and
customer premises losing power than we ever had routers shit themselves in
either a hardware or software fashion. We tended to not run lots of
complicated features on the one box, again we tended to build out at least
a pair of aggregation edge devices for each type of service (PPP,
colocation, business services etc)

Sam


On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Matt Selbst <matt.j.selbst at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Yes indeed I'm talking about the aggregation router failing.
>
> Perhaps clustering multiple chassis although I don't know any Cisco agg
> routers that can do that.
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Sam Silvester <sam.silvester at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Matt Selbst <matt.j.selbst at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Hoping for some advice. What is everyone doing for
>>> terminating point-to-point Ethernet services like AAPT's e-Line in a high
>>> availability environment? Cisco environment.
>>>
>>> With PPPoE, high availability was much easier as you could just have
>>> multiple LNS's and failover easily when the client would re-auth. With
>>> terminating a VLAN handoff on a /30 or /31 it makes HA much harder. If the
>>> customer edge router dies, failover seems pretty hard. VRRP doesn't seem to
>>> be an option especially with hundreds of customer sub-interfaces.
>>>
>>
>> Do you mean HA on the customer side or on your side?
>>
>> e.g. I assume you mean you want to protect against when your aggregation
>> router dies, as obviously the P2P Ethernet service is kind of a single
>> point of failure in and of itself, as is the CPE...
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20170525/ffc8b6ef/attachment.html>