Re: BGP load balancing using Loopbacks.

the statement was just saying that whatever the routing protocol is will
take care of the load balancing, based off the note in the article,
that static routes could be used as easy as eigrp, or another igp or ibgp if
that happened to be the case...

 --
Garry L. Baker

"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine..." - RFC 1925

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Jacek <q.192.168.1.0_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Can you please clarify: "if the routes are BGP routes then BGP (with CEF
> underneath) will take care of the load balancing not the IGP"
>
> BGP can not load balance because it knows only one path to 22.0.0.0 via
> next hop 2.2.2.2.
> RA#show ip bgp
> *> 22.0.0.0 2.2.2.2 0 0 10 i
>
> EIGRP knows how to load balance to next hop 2.2.2.2 and load balancing is
> not equal:
> RA#show ip route eigrp
> D 2.2.2.0 [90/1280640000] via 160.20.20.2, 00:25:53, Serial1/1
> [90/2560640000] via 150.10.10.2, 00:25:53, Serial1/0
>
> I would say that in this topology BGP uses load balancing provided by
> EIGRP.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:17 AM, garry baker <baker.garry_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> article aslo says "*Note: *You can use static routes in the place of a
>> routing protocol in order to introduce two equal-cost paths to reach the
>> destination. In this case, the routing protocol is EIGRP"
>>
>> if the routes are BGP routes then BGP (with CEF underneath) will take care
>> of the load balancing not the IGP
>>
>> check out this command about unequal cost load balaceing for BGP:
>>
>> 'bgp dmzlink-bw'
>>
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/iproute_bgp/command/reference/irg_bgp1.html#wp1113968
>>
>>
>> --
>> Garry L. Baker
>>
>> "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine..." - RFC 1925
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Jacek <q.192.168.1.0_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I am referring to Cisco article:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800945bf.shtml#conf1
>>>
>>> RA(AS11)======EIGRP======RB(AS10)
>>>
>>> Peering is done using loopback interfaces.
>>> RA and RB run EIGRP and advertise Loopbacks and connecting links.
>>> Load balancing between loopback interfaces is assured by EIGRP.
>>>
>>> My question is about Cisco statement:
>>> "This scenario shows how to achieve load sharing when there are multiple
>>> *(up
>>> to a maximum of six), equal-cost links*."
>>>
>>> Why there is a limit of 6 links and why they need to be equal ?
>>> I think that any limits in this scenario are imposed by EIGRP and EIGRP
>>> supports unequal load balancing up to 16 links.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Wed Apr 27 2011 - 09:49:52 ART