Wed Dec 17, 2014 7:58 pm
No need to get snippy, bud. Just a difference of opinion. It's still debatable.
If you're using a single router with dual upstream and failover, you can use packet marks to maintain connection history/NAT tables, however if you operate
with multiple geographic locations (routers) and upstreams, you have no way to synchronize your connection history. A "fake" break results in temporary loss of service while it switches back to the other connection - having to re-establish connections (often with a different IP). Worse yet, if the connection to your remote peer is flapping, you also have a route that is flapping.
At least with "my preferred" method, if my uplink providers were to have a catastrophic routing failure (which would really be the only way they would be disconnected from the rest of the world), I can at least manually adjust the route and correct the issue. One thing I've learned is that "no internet" is often less frustrating than "broken internet".
Just because your method isn't the same as my method does not make one better or worse. There are many ways to skin a cat, my friend.