From: Victor Cappuccio (cvictor@protokolgroup.com)
Date: Sun Apr 02 2006 - 05:19:39 GMT-3
Hi :D
Both are correct. It was like 2 questions in one mail... My bad English
always make misinterpretations
Thanks to both...
Henk de Tombe escribis:
> I've understanded that Victorio asked for per packet based.- process
> switching load-balancing.
>
> "how could you configure A to load balance (per packet based.- Process
> Switching.) to B and to C, saying that you should send 3 packets to B and 6
> packets to C"
>
> He wants to send 3 packets to B and 6 packets to C. In the configuration
> you'll need the configuration with the secondary address and a proper
> load-balancing algorithm IMHO,
>
> If I'm wrong at this please tell me again, maybe I'll fall of my cloud of
> victory and land on earth with two feets on the ground again:-)
>
> Regards,
> Henk
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Brian Dennis [mailto:bdennis@internetworkexpert.com]
> Verzonden: zondag 2 april 2006 8:55
> Aan: Henk de Tombe; Victor Cappuccio; CCIE LAB
> Onderwerp: RE: static route stupid question
>
> The question wasn't about per packet or per destination load balancing.
> The question was how to use static routes to send twice as much traffic
> on one serial link over another serial link.
>
> HTH,
>
> Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security)
> bdennis@internetworkexpert.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987
> Direct: 775-745-6404 (Outside the US and Canada)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henk de Tombe [mailto:henk.de.tombe@qi.nl]
> Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:43 PM
> To: Brian Dennis; Victor Cappuccio; CCIE LAB
> Subject: RE: static route stupid question
>
> Hi,
>
> Hi,
>
> To load balance per packet you can use the following options:
>
> no ip route-cache under each interface, this causes each packets to be
> forwarded by the CPU.
>
> ip load-sharing per-packet with CEF enabled on the router, this does the
> same thing as no ip route-cache but now packets are processed in
> hardware.
>
> The default is to load-balance per destination.
>
> Regards,
> Henk
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] Namens Brian
> Dennis
> Verzonden: zondag 2 april 2006 2:59
> Aan: Victor Cappuccio; CCIE LAB
> Onderwerp: RE: static route stupid question
>
> You would use secondary addressing and point additional static routes to
> the secondary addresses.
>
> Router#sho run int s0/0
> Building configuration...
>
> Current configuration : 132 bytes
> !
> interface Serial0/0
> ip address 10.1.2.1 255.255.255.0 secondary
> ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
> end
>
> Router#sho run int s0/1
> Building configuration...
>
> Current configuration : 74 bytes
> !
> interface Serial0/1
> ip address 172.16.1.1 255.255.255.0
> end
>
> Router#sho run | in ip route
> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.1.2
> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.2.2
> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 172.16.1.2
> Router#
>
> With this configuration S0/0 will be theoretically utilized twice as
> much as S0/1.
>
> HTH,
>
> Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security)
> bdennis@internetworkexpert.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987
> Direct: 775-745-6404 (Outside the US and Canada)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Victor Cappuccio
> Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 2:49 PM
> To: CCIE LAB
> Subject: static route stupid question
>
> Hello List, I have a real gap in my static route knowledge So please
> excuse this very stupid question.- it's just that I'm far away from a
> couple off routers to this test..
>
> Could you do load balancing using static routes??
> Lets say that you have
>
>
> .|---------------B--------|
> A |-Destination
> .|---------------C--------|
>
> Never mind the L3 L2 address resolution, let just say that they are
> point to point links, so with out the use of any routing protocol, how
> could you configure A to load balance (per packet based.- Process
> Switching.) to B and to C, saying that you should send 3 packets to B
> and 6 packets to C
>
> Could this be possible??
>
> Thanks
> Victor.-
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 01 2006 - 11:41:55 GMT-3