[c-nsp] re: 2600 load balancing

[Josh Gentry]

Interesting.  I knew MLPPP avoided the out of order packet problem by 
putting packets back in order at the end of the bundle, but I wasn't 
aware of the interleaving feature.  

Definately need to setup Cisco MLPPP in the lab.

Thanks,

Josh

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:59:51AM -0800, Vandy Hamidi wrote:
> Sorry, Josh it was directed for Alban.
> 
> I noticed your commend on MLPPP on Cisco.  I've used it and it works
> well for shared voice and data networks.  Using interlacing and
> fragmentation, MLPPP can help to reduce jitter on circuits where data
> and voice compete.
> 
> Be aware, some MPLS providers don't support interlacing and may ask you
> not to use it.  The beauty of private links,
> 
> 	-=Vandy=-
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Josh Gentry [mailto:jgentry at swcp.com] 
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 11:24 AM
> To: Vandy Hamidi
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] re: 2600 load balancing
> 
> Vandy,
> 
> Are you refering to the original question?  That was not Josh.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Josh
> 
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:19:24AM -0800, Vandy Hamidi wrote:
> > 
> > Josh,
> > This isn't a cut and dry question.  It depends on what type of data
> you
> > are sending over the link (voip, CIFS, internet, etc).  What type of
> > link it is, HDLC, PPP, Frame, etc.  Private link or provider link
> (i.e.
> > do you have control of both ends).
> > 
> > Get that info back to the list and we can help.
> > 
> > Also, I recommend do your research on serialization delays and T1 Link
> > aggregation online.  There are enormous amounts of information on this
> > topic that will do a far better job of explaining your question.
> > 
> > Getting the answer from the list is just part of it. You need to
> > understand the answer because situations alter the right design.
> > 
> > 	-=Vandy=-
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Josh Gentry
> > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 7:34 AM
> > To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: [c-nsp] re: 2600 load balancing
> > 
> > Hi.  I'm new to the list and  responding to a thread I saw in the 
> > archive.  Subject of the thread is 2600 load balancing.  The question 
> > was about load balancing across 2 T1's.
> > 
> > >I have a cisco 2620 (MPC860) router with two T1-s connected to it.
> > > 
> > > What would be the best method to load balance the traffic between
> the
> > two?
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > Alban
> > > _____________________
> > 
> > There has been a resulting discussion of using multilink PPP.  I do
> not 
> > personally have experience with MLPPP with Cisco's, so I can not
> comment
> > 
> > on that, except I've read it can increase processor load.  What I do 
> > have experience with is the per-packet load balancing with CEF.  I've 
> > written a little doc about it that might be helpful.  Feedback also 
> > appreciated.
> > 
> > http://www.joshgentry.com/cisco/cisco-load.html
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Josh
> > 
> > -- 
> > Josh Gentry 
> > help at swcp.com * jgentry at swcp.com *  505-232-7992
> > Good Art Lives at http://www.jkdrummond.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Josh Gentry 
> help at swcp.com * jgentry at swcp.com *  505-232-7992
> Good Art Lives at http://www.jkdrummond.com/
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Josh Gentry 
help at swcp.com * jgentry at swcp.com *  505-232-7992
Good Art Lives at http://www.jkdrummond.com/