I found Ivan Pepelnjak's blog post from 2007 talking about this exact solution:
http://blog.ioshints.info/2007/02/unequal-load-split-with-static-routes.html
I highly respect Brian and Ivan, but in this case I'm not really
convinced. IOS is telling me otherwise and I'm stubborn not to believe
it ;-)
-- Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert FREE CCIE training: http://bit.ly/vLecture Mailto: markom_at_ipexpert.com Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/ On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 16:40, Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com> wrote: > I don't follow every topic on GS in detail, but as I said - I haven't > tested this. > > Do you have a link to a document where this is detailed? > > -- > Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 > Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert > > FREE CCIE training: http://bit.ly/vLecture > > Mailto: markom_at_ipexpert.com > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 > Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/ > > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 16:32, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> wrote: >> AFAIK, it's been documented that it works as Brian says, i.e., 5:2 relation, >> or even 7:3 if need be. >> This same topic has been here some 2 or 3 months ago ? >> -Carlos >> >> Marko Milivojevic @ 02/05/2011 20:06 -0300 dixit: >>> >>> To make my argument further: >>> >>> R2#sh ip cef 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 detail >>> 0.0.0.0/0, epoch 0, per-destination sharing >>> B DefNet source: 0.0.0.0/0 >>> B recursive via 169.254.1.1 >>> B B recursive via 10.0.0.1 >>> B B B attached to GigabitEthernet0/0 >>> B recursive via 169.254.1.2 >>> B B recursive via 10.0.0.1 >>> B B B attached to GigabitEthernet0/0 >>> B recursive via 169.254.1.3 >>> B B recursive via 10.0.0.1 >>> B B B attached to GigabitEthernet0/0 >>> B recursive via 169.254.1.4 >>> B B recursive via 10.0.0.1 >>> B B B attached to GigabitEthernet0/0 >>> B recursive via 169.254.1.5 >>> B B recursive via 10.0.0.1 >>> B B B attached to GigabitEthernet0/0 >>> B recursive via 169.254.2.1 >>> B B recursive via 20.0.0.2 >>> B B B attached to GigabitEthernet0/1 >>> B recursive via 169.254.2.2 >>> B B recursive via 20.0.0.2 >>> B B B attached to GigabitEthernet0/1 >>> >>> As you can see, CEF resolves this in the manner I described. >>> >>> -- >>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 >>> Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert >>> >>> FREE CCIE training: http://bit.ly/vLecture >>> >>> Mailto: markom_at_ipexpert.com >>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 >>> Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/ >>> >>> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 15:55, Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 15:52, Brian McGahan <bmcgahan_at_ine.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Yes each route is equal, but more point to one exit point vs. another. >>>>> Try it, it works. >>>> >>>> Just to make it clear - I'm not arguing. I like the solution, but I'm >>>> not sure if it's going to solve the problem for the reasons below. >>>> >>>> I'm sure they will show in the routing table as 7 different routes. >>>> However, when CEF resolves adjacencies, there will still be only two >>>> exits. While we may have the impression that we have 5:2 ratio by >>>> looking into the RIB, are we _actually_ going to have it with the >>>> traffic. >>>> >>>> Without generating the traffic and measuring the output, I'm not quite >>>> sure how to test this... >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 >>>> Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert >>>> >>>> FREE CCIE training: http://bit.ly/vLecture >>>> >>>> Mailto: markom_at_ipexpert.com >>>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 >>>> Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/ >>> >>> >>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net >>> >>> _______________________________________________________________________ >>> Subscription information may be found at: >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Carlos G Mendioroz B <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> B LW7 EQI B Argentina Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.netReceived on Mon May 02 2011 - 16:48:41 ART
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Jun 01 2011 - 09:01:11 ART