From: Mark Lewis (markl11@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Aug 17 2000 - 07:02:00 GMT-3
Hi,
The traffic-share balanced command allows load balancing. Traffic-share min
disallows load balancing, but allows multiple routes in the routing
table.'That's useless', you might be thinking, but it's pretty useful - with
igrp there's no topology table (unlike eigrp), so if the primary route
fails, you have to wait until holddown has timed out before you can get a
new route. If you are using traffic-share min then although there's no load
balancing, there's now a backup route in the routing table ready to be used
if the primary fails.
Note that the 'backup route' still has to fulfill the feasibility condition
(ie. advertised distance of backup route is less than feasible distance
(total metric) of best route).
Hope that helps,
Mark
>From: Cisco@datastreet.com (Matt Lachberg 3)
>Reply-To: Cisco@datastreet.com (Matt Lachberg 3)
>To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: IGRP traffic share
>Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 12:22:42 -0700
>
>Command Purpose
>traffic-share {balanced | min} Distribute traffic proportionately to the
>ratios of metrics, or by the minimum-cost route.
>
>
>Am I right on this, balanced will do a per packet distribution based on the
>variance command, and min will only send it out the minimum-cost route thus
>disabling the variance command? Where would I use this "traffic-share min"
>
>
>Matthew Lachberg, CCNP, CCDP, MSCE
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:24:27 GMT-3