the customer complain that the internet is very slow they have 2 IGW NE40, the 2 NE40 running bgp with Telephonica and France Telecom .check the attachment to see the topology.
Action for problem 1:-
when the traffic reach NE40-2 then it's redirected again to NE40-1 coz the NE40-2 has the default route (last choice for forwarding) and has also best path through NE40-1, so we add the IP-prefix to deny the full internet route received from FT, and this also we speed up the forwarding speed in the NE40-1:-
ip ip-prefix FT-in-all-the-routes-denied index 5 deny 0.0.0.0 32
peer 188.8.131.52 ip-prefix FT-in-all-the-routes-denied import
ip route-static 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 184.108.40.206 preference 20
same configuration we did in NE40-2:-
ip ip-prefix telefonica-in-all-the-routes-denied index 5 deny 0.0.0.0 32
peer 220.127.116.11 ip-prefix telefonica-in-all-the-routes-denied import
ip route-static 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 18.104.22.168 preference 20
the static route is imported in the IGP
action 2 :-
we add physical link between the NE40-1 and NE40-2 so the IPBGP peer is established through this link direct link.
after that the customer notice that the speed is become so fast and they were very staisfy
the 2 NE40 is connected with 2 cisco switches, the cisco switches are connected with access switch, BRAS and others, so when we start analyzeing the problem we find the following:-
1- the NE40-2 receive the defulat route from telephonica.
2- the NE40-1 recieve the full internet route from FT. (problem 1)
3- the total traffic is not too much and it's occupying around 75% from the total bandwidth, so the internet must not face any problem as the bandwidth is engouh to handle the traffic.
4- the 2 NE40 is not direct connected so the IBGP peer between the 2 NE40 is established through the cisco switches and the routing update is pass through the cisco switches (problem 2).
the optimization work is very important to increase the customer satisfaction and we need to care about this optimization work.