From: Herbert Maosa (asawilunda@googlemail.com)
Date: Mon Sep 24 2007 - 19:31:18 ART
I wouldn't bother. Considering that only the minimum bandwidth is considered
in the metric calculation, really to influence the path you dont have to
change the bandwidth in too many places. You only need to change at a few
strategic points in such a way to outset the minimum bandwidth of the entire
path. Then the rest will now depend on delay as this component is
cumulative.
Herbert.
On 9/24/07, Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
>
> Sure, why not!
>
> If no where in your packet does it mention (and read carefully!!!) that
> you
> can't change the default k values, then go for it!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Sadiq Yakasai
> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 5:38 PM
> To: groupstudy
> Subject: Would it be game? EIGRP Load Balancing!
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> So with EIGRP load balancing.....
>
> If its not specifically mentioned in the whole of the EIGRP
> configuration, would it be ok to adjust the K weights (making K1 = 0,
> for BW component) so that my load balancing would only be dependent on
> the delay component of my EIGRP metric?
>
> That would make life alot easier....
>
> Thanks in advance...
>
> Sadiq
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-- Kindest regards, hm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 06 2007 - 12:01:15 ART