25 May
2017
25 May
'17
9:14 a.m.
The current version of the encap file shows a route to 44.128.0.0/16
via the new amprgw address of 169.228.34.84:
route addprivate 44.128/16 encap 169.228.34.84
RIP should already be advertising it.
I don't believe this will cause any problems.
Your gateways and firewalls can start learning it, and I can use it
to debug the new installation. What we'll do is change the routing at
the UCSD border to direct traffic for that one /16 subnet to the new amprgw
instead of the old one right away, and after everything appears to be
working properly, we'll change the route for the entire 44.0.0.0/8.
Both systems already have a secondary address of 44.0.0.1, so that
changeover will be automatic.
Of course, the people announcing their own subnets via BGP won't be
affected by this change.
- Brian
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 08:45:58AM -0400, lleachii--- via 44Net wrote:
At that time, can we seed a dummy /32 address with a
route to the NEW_AMPRGW
- from the AMPR Test Subnet or from 44.0.0.0/24?
This will allow the new address to enter our tables, especially for those
running dynamic firewalls against the Encap list - since it's TBD if the
router/GW will move last, or sometime before the completed migration.
So..basically on that day, something like:
- Brian changes GWs at the TBD time
- We all change our default route (if in use)
- the route to 44.0.0.1 changes
- the dummy route is removed