From: Brian McGahan (bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com)
Date: Wed Aug 31 2005 - 12:56:40 GMT-3
Only routes with an equal composite metric will be installed in
the routing table.
Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Sunil Almeida
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 10:50 AM
> To: Jaycee Cockburn - BCX SS; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Traffic-share balance keyword
>
> Actually I was preferring to "traffic-share balanced" with "
variance
> 1" , what happens in this scenario
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jaycee Cockburn - BCX SS [mailto:Jaycee.Cockburn@bcx.co.za]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 10:14 AM
> To: Sunil Almeida; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Traffic-share balance keyword
> Importance: High
>
> Hi S,
>
> On the routers you should have two options regarding traffic-share eg
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Switch(config-router)#traffic-share ?
> balanced Share inversely proportional to metric
> min All traffic shared among min metric paths
> ------------------------------------------------------
> So with the "balanced" option the traffic will be sent over each
route,
> and the amount of packets sent will be determined according to the
> metric. The smaller the metric, the more packets using that route etc.
>
> With the "min" keyword, as I understand (and please correct me if I am
> dilly), all the routes (unequal or not, determined by variance, but
> feasible) will be in the routing table, but only the best one will be
> used (unless if they are equal..)
>
> Hope this helps man!
>
> Cheers
> JC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Sunil Almeida
> Sent: 31 August 2005 07:50 AM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Traffic-share balance keyword
>
> Hello , here's a question on traffic-share balanced keyword
>
>
> router eigrp 5
> traffic-share balanced
> variance 1
>
>
> The above is an example from cisco Doc CD ,
>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/
> fiprrp_r/1rfeigrp.htm#wp1024898
>
>
> "variance 1" is for equal path loadbalancing , so what is the use of
> traffic-share balance syntax here.
>
> Does it serve any purpose ?
>
> Thanks
> Sunil
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Sep 04 2005 - 17:01:20 GMT-3