«

I'm seeking out advice on connecting multihomed access & distribution
devices back to a redundant core. Currently I'm working with a mix of
methods.

1) A /28 or /27 VLAN was created on each core router to contain the
aggregate links to the lower layered devices. The access/distribution
devices have a L3 interface in this subnet.

2) A /30 is used between the core routers and the access/distribution
layer devices.

3) A /29 with HSRP is used across the core routers on L3 VLAN
interfaces and across the Ethernet interfaces on the
access/distribution devices. Each core router has VLAN with a L3
address in the /29 and a common standby IP also in the /29. The
access/distribution layer device has 2 Ethernet links back to the core
that are 1Q trunks. That VLAN has a L3 address in the /29. This only
works on a few devices, namely switches used for aggregation or routers
with L2 ports like ENET HWICs.

I'm trying to figure out what the best approach is in this service
provider environment. I personally favor #2. I believe this fits in
better with a clean hierarchical IGP. I'm moving from OSPF to IS-IS in
the very near future and would like to better utilize areas than they
have been in the past (OSPF area 0 is touching every single device).
#1 would make it difficult to separate IS-IS areas I think, especially
if I use the VLANs for inter-connection VLANs for more than one type of
device that should be in separate areas.

IPs aren't a concern. We're migrating from a public to a private IP
infrastructure for the heart of this service provider. This will make
ARIN happy.


On a related topic, I'm also soliciting advice on the basic
configuration moving forward for edge and aggregation devices. Like I
said earlier, we're moving to a pure IS-IS environment with a redundant
core. All devices will be multihomed to the redundant core routers.
All devices whether it be an access server, router terminating ATM PVCs
for DSL, or a pair of aggregation switches that mulithome CMTSs will be
running IS-IS and will be advertising the local routes back to the core
(some with summarization like the access servers and ATM routers). The
access/distribution layer devices are set up in one of 2 ways right
now. Either their default route is originated in the IGP or they use a
static default route (and in some cases still receive an default route
from the IGP but don't use it). Should I originate a default route and
remove the static default, should I use the static default route, or
should I have a higher cost static route as a backup (rather useless I
think)? Is there a best practice on this one that I can cite?


I just thought of another quick question. Do many people use (or find
useful) 1Q trunks in a service provider network? I only have 2 1Q
trunks in this entire network. Personally I would rather use L3
routing between capable devices wherever possible. I suppose if I use
a pair of switches for aggregation (EMI code on 3750s or 4948s for
example) I could use a pair of 1Q trunks between then for HSRP
purposes. Do any other uses come to mind?

Thanks
J