From: Scott Livingston (scottl@sprinthosting.net)
Date: Wed Feb 19 2003 - 01:52:29 GMT-3
Static routes too - along w/ IGP's.
BGP; we can use 'max-paths' in order to get some egress LB / LS.
scott
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
cannonr
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 8:02 PM
To: Gary Duncanson
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: BGP load sharing or load balancing
With Per packet load-balancing, you are splitting the load on a
per-packet
basis. Packet A traverses pipe A, second packet traverses alternate
pipe,
etc. In order to achieve per packet load-balancing, you need to have a
routing protocol like Eigrp or OSPF running and must have equal cost
paths
to the destination (Unless you are using Variance in EIGRP). BGP
doesn't
support it. You also need to either have CEF or process switching
enabled
on the interfaces. One other thing you must do is change the load
balancing
method from the default method, per destination load-balancing to
per-packet
load-balancing (at the interface level). Per packet load-balancing can
be
used on PTP links, but it is probably not a good idea to use it on
slower
links especially if you are running applications that don't play well
with
receiving packets out of sequence..... VOIP...
Per destination load-balancing is the default load-balancing method. If
you
have two links to the same destination with the same metric or cost and
you
are using a routing pro such as EIGRP or OSPF (works with static routes
too), A flow to destination A will travers pipe A, while a flow to
destination B will traverse pipe B. Per destination LB is kinda nice
because if you are not using QOS and someone is downloading a large
file,
they will only monopolize one link.
BGP doesn't technically support load-balancing since it only installs
one
route per network in the routing table, however you can get some
load-sharing out of it by taking either partial routes or full routes
from
your ISP's. Network A uses Link A, Network B uses link B, etc.
HTH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Duncanson" <gary.duncanson@avt.co.uk>
To: "Casey, Paul (6822)" <Paul.Casey@o2.com>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 6:14 PM
Subject: RE: BGP load sharing or load balancing
> Thanks Paul,
>
> Can you or anyone else please give a definition of load
balancing
and load sharing please? I hear a lot about 'per packet' load balancing.
>
> Thanks
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Casey, Paul (6822) [mailto:Paul.Casey@o2.com]
> Sent: Wed 19/02/2003 00:12
> To: Gary Duncanson
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: BGP load sharing or load balancing
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2003 - 11:06:27 GMT-3