cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Active/Active Solution

Highlighted
Comes here often

Active/Active Solution

Hi All,

I have design to adhere to which has changed recently and wanted to see if there is way or producing the desired solution while maintaining my Meraki end to end objective.

There will be 2 internet breakouts cross campus (circa ~3k apart) this was previously going to be handled by using a single LAN extended across the campus with active/standby on the firewalls, with the ISP doing BGP/VRRP failover and the MX applaince in each location.

However the scope now needs for both internet breakouts to be in use, i.e. active/active, sot he previous plan is out the window.

What i was thinking is, could the two appliances be setup separately (i.e. not paired) with the gateways being 192.168.200.252 and 192.168.200.253 with failover routes on the core switching, effectively using which ever MX is local with failover in the event of either “site” failing.


The solution would be MS350 Core with MS225 edge switch and MX250’s (possibly 450)

 

Another option I was thinking about, just deploy the 2 sites completely separately, with MPLS added via the ISP, site to site links via both the 1GB point to point, and 10GB over the air wireless link (point to point again) (probably overkill but is specified to be included)


Im in assuming the second option the ISP can failover the “shared public IPs etc”

 

Open to suggestion or critique 

1 REPLY 1
Highlighted
Kind of a big deal

Re: Active/Active Solution

Without knowing more I would say either solutio could be made to work. However, you said:

 

"Im in assuming the second option the ISP can failover the “shared public IPs etc”"

 

And I suspect the answer here is actually, no, they cannot. usually this requires BGP interaction between you and your provider(s). 

Welcome to the Meraki Community!
To start contributing, simply sign in with your Cisco account. If you don't yet have a Cisco account, you can sign up.