CEF/IOS should now support 8 equal cost paths in the 'S' train as of 12.0(14)S.
-Bruce
At 11:54 AM 2/13/2001 -0800, Jim Warner wrote:
>The original question from Martin Picard:
>
> > I have two routers with 8-T1 interfaces.
> > How much benefit do I have by using MLPPP
> > to bundle them instead of using separate
> > serial interfaces ?
>
>A partial answer from Phil Bedard:
>
>+ The router won't balance more than 6 parallel paths I believe, so
>+ the only real option is MPPP.
>
>The load balancing schemes other than MLPPP (i.e. CEF):
>
> Per-packet load balancing allows the router to send data packets over
> successive equal-cost paths without regard to individual destination
> hosts or user sessions. Path utilization is good, but packets destined
> for a given destination host might take different paths and might arrive
> out of order.
>
> -- or --
>
> Per-destination load balancing allows the router to use multiple,
> equal-cost paths to achieve load sharing. Packets for a given source-
> destination host pair are guaranteed to take the same path, even if
> multiple, equal-cost paths are available. Traffic for different source-
> destination host pairs tend to take different paths.
>
> [above quotes from cisco docs]
>
>If you need to be able to deliver all of your collected bandwidth
>to a single TCP connection (e.g. backups running late at night) without
>reordering packets, you want to use MLPPP or AIM.
>
>AIM ("A" stands for ATM) makes the collected T-1s look like a single big
>pipe, but incurs the cell header overhead of ATM, the expense of very
>fancy interface cards, and the cost of ATM ports from your LEC.
>
>jim warner
>UC Santa Cruz
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:29 EDT