Thanks for all your comments guys. With regards to bgp I did think about placing two bgp routers in front of the ssg's. However my limited understanding makes me think that if I had two bgp connections from different providers I would still have issues. So I guess that if my primary Internet goes down I lose connectivity to all the publicly addressed devices on that connection. Like dmz hosts and so on. I would be interested to hear how this can be avoided if at all or do I have to use the same provider. I should add that we currently have provisioned two ssg in ha mode. Also is terminating bgp on the ssg also an option? I really like the flexibility of route based VPN with addresable tun interfaces. Thanks adel On Sun 3:47 PM , "Joe Maimon" jmaimon@ttec.com sent:

adel@ baklawasecrets.com wrote:> HI,

...

Now I couldn't get any good answers as to why

Internet connections 1 and 2 need to be separate. I think the idea was to make sure that there was enough bandwidth for the third party support VPN. I feel that I can consolidate this into one connection and just use rate limiting to reserve some portion of the bandwidth on the connection and this should be fine. Now if I was to do this then I can make a case for just having one backup Internet connection. However I'm still concerned about failover and reliability issues. So my questions regarding this are:>

I wouldnt jump to any conclusions that everything will work properly if you are terminating multiple connections directly on the SSG, what with egress likely being different than the ingress, even if you are using the same IP range (BGP) on all the links.

You could really be asking for trouble if you are planning on using a different ISP provided IP range on each connection for each purpose.

Front it all with routers that can policy route, whether or not you also use BGP.

Joe