Routing

last person joined: 5 days ago 

Ask questions and share experiences about ACX Series, CTP Series, MX Series, PTX Series, SSR Series, JRR Series, and all things routing, including portfolios and protocols.
  • 1.  ECMP and BGP multipath on SRX routing instance

    Posted 08-21-2018 04:02

    Hello,

     

    regarding this document, we can configure an SRX firewall to loadbalance traffic between two or more equal-cost BGP advertised routes.

     

    Nevertheless, it also says that you can only apply the per-packet load balancing export policy on the default routing instance, so it is not clear if that would apply to all routing instances or just to the default one. I couldn't find more information on this specific topic

     

    Would someone be able to shed some light on this?

     

    Thanks in advance, 

     

    Pablo



  • 2.  RE: ECMP and BGP multipath on SRX routing instance

    Posted 08-21-2018 04:13

    It looks like this option is NOT available inside a routing instance so it could not be applied

     

    [edit routing-options]
    user@R1# set forwarding-table export loadbal

     

     



  • 3.  RE: ECMP and BGP multipath on SRX routing instance
    Best Answer

    Posted 08-21-2018 05:45

    Hello,

    Forwarding table load-balancing policy  applies to :

    1/ global routing table/GRT

    2/ routing-instances of type "virtual-router" and "forwarding" 

    3/ It is also a prerequisite for multipath load-balance for routing-instances of type "vrf" where following additional knob is required for load-balancing along MPLS paths

    set routing-instances BLAH routing-options multipath [vpn-unequal-path]

    [1] and [2] are applicable for SRX in flow mode

    [3] is applicable for SRX in packet mode

    HTH

    Thx

    Alex



  • 4.  RE: ECMP and BGP multipath on SRX routing instance

    Posted 08-21-2018 12:00

    Brilliant, I did a quick & dirty PoC with vSRX and I see two entries installed in the forwarding table, but I could not find any document where it states that it is the intended behaviour, thanks for the confirmation, case [2] in your list is what applies in my case 🙂

     

    Thank you sir!

     

    Pablo