|reply to unwired |
Re: OSPF Backhauls
said by unwired:If I understand your question then the answer would be: you dont have to worry about it, thats what OSPF will take care of, and the reason we use routing protocols like that.
It is how would you maintain management access to the bridge in the event the link went down or you dropped the link for maintianance purposes.
If you have redundant paths around your network, then if one of them fails, the subnets attached to the routers either side of that failed links simply become available via other paths.
If you have an existing connection open to a device, packets for that connection should start routing via the new path. If you try to establish a connection, then again packets route via the new paths to reach the device.
When the link comes back up and OSPF determines there is a better path, all packets start routing via that path again.
There is likely to be a short delay as OSPF realises that a link has failed and withdraws routes via that path and it propagates around the network.
Naturally if you've done something like what I illustrated above, then its easy enough to lose access to a device when the link drops, since it is "connected" to a device over the link that has gone down.
If you have redundant paths then yes, definitely have each radio on each side of a link connected management wise to its local router to take advantage of routing around link failures.