And you'd have to get the ISP to agree on it... and the T1s would have to go
into the same router (I doubt you'd get anyone to set up multi-chassis MLPPP
for you).
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Warner [mailto:warner@cats.UCSC.EDU]
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 1999 4:44 PM
To: mcmahon@bbn.com; rbuchals@hotmail.com; SAKeoseyan@broadwing.com
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net; sblair@cerf.net
Subject: RE: static routing
I'll add to this lively discussion that there's another approach (skinned
cat) to this. You can merge your T1s at layer 2 and get virtual interface
that will have 2 x 1.5 Mbit/s. You configure multilink PPP. This is
what's commonly done to merge two channels in ISDN to make a 128 kb pipe,
but it can be done at T-1 speeds if you've got enough CPU power.
Cisco has a nice note on this at:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/120newft/120
t/120t3/multippp.htm
Reordering of packets at the output end of the MPPP link is included in
the protocol.
In this discussion it hasn't come up as a requirement, but I believe that
the downside of CEF is that any sort of priority queuing is out the window.
I believe that multilink PPP permits priority queueing.
Probably all this will use _lots_ of CPU.
-jim warner, UCSC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:07 EDT