2 lines

[Daniel Feenberg]

On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Terje Elde wrote:

> On 29. juli 2013, at 18:38, "Zyumbilev, Peter" <peter at aboutsupport.com> wrote:
>> Not sure what is the best way nowadays to get own /24 or at least /26 ?
>
> I don't think you ever said if this was two links from the same 
> provider, or two different providers. That's a huge factor in what your 
> options are.
>
> You'll have a hard time doing BGP-based failover with a /26. It's just 
> too small a route to be announced globally.
>
> This stuff isn't just a technical question, but also one of policy and 
> politics. In order to get to a proper solution, your best option is 
> probably to give the provider(s) a call, and explain what you'd like to 
> do.
>
> Depening on a lot of things, one option could be to have the provider 
> owning the IP(s) tunnel it over the other link durin fault. Hard to say 
> if they will, so you really nedd to talk to them.
>
> In the meantime, DNS-failover is a lot better than nothing.

Did the OP say he was running servers at all? If there are no servers, 
then any of a number of "dual-wan routers" will handle the problem with no 
difficulty and minimal expense. If he is running servers, these routers 
generally come with built in software to do dynamic updates of DNS, that I 
understand works, provided you don't have unreasonable expectations about 
reliability. Just because some institutions can't stand 5 minutes of 
downtime doesn't mean there isn't a legitimate use for facilities that 
suffer 5 minutes of downtime several times a year.

daniel feenberg
NBER

>
> Terje
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>