From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 29 17:03:10 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A5BA74 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:03:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from terje@elde.net) Received: from keepquiet.net (keepquiet.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:130:84c1::deaf:babe]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 115D522B2 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:03:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.130.11.108] (cm-84.210.76.250.getinternet.no [84.210.76.250]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: terje@elde.net) by keepquiet.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 126BB2E40B; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:03:07 +0200 (CEST) References: <51F66820.4080907@aboutsupport.com> <51F668E2.4090806@aboutsupport.com> <1375105599.9477.2811311.2C84EDDD@webmail.messagingengine.com> <51F69A9F.3050800@aboutsupport.com> In-Reply-To: <51F69A9F.3050800@aboutsupport.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: <62E804FE-0941-4F40-83C5-8BCAC26CB3E0@elde.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10B329) From: Terje Elde Subject: Re: 2 lines Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:03:04 +0200 To: "Zyumbilev, Peter" Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:03:10 -0000 On 29. juli 2013, at 18:38, "Zyumbilev, Peter" wrot= e: > 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.=20 You'll have a hard time doing BGP-based failover with a /26. It's just too s= mall a route to be announced globally.=20 This stuff isn't just a technical question, but also one of policy and polit= ics. In order to get to a proper solution, your best option is probably to g= ive the provider(s) a call, and explain what you'd like to do.=20 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 wi= ll, so you really nedd to talk to them.=20 In the meantime, DNS-failover is a lot better than nothing.=20 Terje