[ixpmanager] BIRD / Route Server: Load-balancing traffic for member with multiple connections

Frank Habicht geier at geier.ne.tz
Sun Jun 21 09:23:06 IST 2026


Hi,

I seem to remember that there once was a presentation at Euro-IX [?] by 
VIX (Vienna) about how they try to localise traffic on a single
IXP POP/site.

When, for instance, the destination-peer has two connections at separate 
POPs, and traffic from source-peer at location A should not be sent to 
destination-peer on location B while destination-peer also has a 
connection on location A. But I can't find it now.
[i hope that's the original question...?]

https://www.vix.at/en/technology-services/bgp-communities seems to 
reflect current practice.


Regards,
Frank

sorry if OT for IXPManager


On 6/19/2026 9:32 PM, Salvador Bertenbreiter via ixpmanager wrote:
> Hi André,
> Great point, I think MED should solve the issue of which one is the 
> preferred gateway.
> 
> About Add Path Tx, I will read more about that, it sounds like a great 
> solution to offer multi-site balance solution using ECMP.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> 
> Sent from Gmail Mobile
> 
> El El vie, 19 jun. 2026 a la(s) 11:06, Kyle Spencer via ixpmanager 
> <ixpmanager at inex.ie <mailto:ixpmanager at inex.ie>> escribió:
> 
>     Thanks for raising this.
> 
>     We are multi-site and some customers have multi-site redundancy.
>     They manage flows by remotely enabling/disabling interfaces at
>     either end. This seems like a much better solution.
> 
>     Might be good to add something about this to the docs :)
> 
>     On Fri, Jun 19, 2026 at 9:16 AM André Grüneberg via ixpmanager
>     <ixpmanager at inex.ie <mailto:ixpmanager at inex.ie>> wrote:
> 
>         Dear Salvador,
> 
>         It's part of the features of a route server that it only sends
>         one -- the "best path" -- route to it's neighbors.
>         I assume the tie breaker in your case will be the router ID (see
>         https://bird.nic.cz/doc/bird-2.17.5.html#bgp-route-select-rules
>         <https://bird.nic.cz/doc/bird-2.17.5.html#bgp-route-select-rules>).
>         If the peer is announcing multiple prefixes, they could set e.g.
>         different MEDs for each prefix, so Bird would have some earlier
>         tie breaks towards the other router.
> 
>         Besides all that, you could enable Add Path Tx. This will give
>         the peers' routers the chance to employ ECMP (or their own
>         policies FWIW).
> 
>         We have enabled this on our route servers for quite some time
>         now. It's just adding a line "add paths tx;" to the channel in
>         the BGP protocols in the Bird config.
> 
>         You may find this in our skinned version of the Bird config:
>         https://github.com/bcix/IXP-Manager/blob/
>         f5acc6bfdee8479041623479b9606e5c2033f098/resources/skins/bcix/
>         api/v4/router/server/bird2/rs01/neighbors.foil.php#L373
>         <https://github.com/bcix/IXP-Manager/blob/
>         f5acc6bfdee8479041623479b9606e5c2033f098/resources/skins/bcix/
>         api/v4/router/server/bird2/rs01/neighbors.foil.php#L373>
>         Maybe Barry wants to add this feature to the default distribution?
> 
>         Unfortunately not all peers' routers have Add Path Rx enabled on
>         their side. So, you may want to educate your peers to enable it
>         for BGP sessions with route servers.
> 
>         Hope this helps,
>         André
> 
>         On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 at 04:26, Salvador Bertenbreiter via
>         ixpmanager <ixpmanager at inex.ie <mailto:ixpmanager at inex.ie>> wrote:
> 
>             Hi community,
> 
>             I hope you are doing well.
> 
>             We have a case involving a member with two separate
>             connections to the peering LAN. Each connection has its own
>             IP address, and both sessions are established with our Route
>             Server.
> 
>             The member is concerned because all downstream traffic, from
>             their perspective, is currently being received through only
>             one of the two connections.
> 
>             I checked the Looking Glass, and both connections are
>             announcing the same prefixes with the same AS-PATH. However,
>             BIRD consistently selects all prefixes as primary via only
>             one of the two sessions.
> 
>             The member mentioned that they are not able to announce
>             more-specific prefixes from one router and less-specific
>             prefixes from the other router, which would otherwise be a
>             possible way to influence traffic distribution.
> 
>             I was wondering if there is any recommended way to achieve
>             some form of load-balancing in this scenario. Specifically:
> 
>              1. Is it possible for the Route Server / BIRD to "load-
>                 balance" between two equivalent next-hops for the same
>                 prefix, so that downstream traffic towards the member
>                 can be distributed across both connections?
>              2. If ECMP is not supported or not recommended in this
>                 context, is there a way in IXP Manager or BIRD to
>                 influence which session is preferred? For example, can
>                 we assign a higher local preference to one of the
>                 member’s sessions so that the Route Server selects that
>                 connection as the primary next-hop?
>              3. More generally, what would be the recommended
>                 operational approach for handling members with multiple
>                 connections announcing the same prefixes to the Route
>                 Server?
> 
>             Any guidance or best practices would be greatly appreciated.
> 
>             Best regards,
> 
>             Salvador Bertenbreiter
> 
>             _______________________________________________
>             INEX IXP Manager mailing list
>             ixpmanager at inex.ie <mailto:ixpmanager at inex.ie>
>             Unsubscribe or change options here: https://www.inex.ie/
>             mailman/listinfo/ixpmanager <https://www.inex.ie/mailman/
>             listinfo/ixpmanager>
> 
> 
> 
>         -- 
>         André Grüneberg, Managing Director
>         andre.grueneberg at bcix.de <mailto:andre.grueneberg at bcix.de>
>         +49 30 2332195 42
> 
>         BCIX Management GmbH
>         Albrechtstr. 110
>         12103 Berlin
>         Germany
> 
>         Geschäftsführer/Managing Directors: Jens Lietzmann, André Grüneberg
>         Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 143581 B
> 
>         _______________________________________________
>         INEX IXP Manager mailing list
>         ixpmanager at inex.ie <mailto:ixpmanager at inex.ie>
>         Unsubscribe or change options here: https://www.inex.ie/mailman/
>         listinfo/ixpmanager <https://www.inex.ie/mailman/listinfo/
>         ixpmanager>
> 
> 
> 
>     -- 
>     Cell / WhatsApp / Signal: +256786350675
>     _______________________________________________
>     INEX IXP Manager mailing list
>     ixpmanager at inex.ie <mailto:ixpmanager at inex.ie>
>     Unsubscribe or change options here: https://www.inex.ie/mailman/
>     listinfo/ixpmanager <https://www.inex.ie/mailman/listinfo/ixpmanager>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> INEX IXP Manager mailing list
> ixpmanager at inex.ie
> Unsubscribe or change options here: https://www.inex.ie/mailman/listinfo/ixpmanager



More information about the ixpmanager mailing list