this is exactly what I wanted.. though in our case,
we use two 128K and reason... cheaper.
thnx
tatsuya
いつもお世話になっております かわさき@ giganetです。
かわさき
= = = = = =
電話 03-3239-0607 fax 03-3239-2609
business network telecom
http://www.giganet.net
On Tue, 3 Feb 1998, David Schmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, Tatsuya Kawasaki wrote:
>
> > Dear Cisco users and ISP,
> >
> > I am wondering if any of you, as always, give me any suggestion
> > about how to create equal network load if there is
> > two cisco's which are connected with two leased lines.
> >
> > Cisco A s0 <------> Cisco B so
> > Cisoc A s1 <------> Cisco B s1
> >
> > and say, on the LAN port of Cisco A has NAS(s).
> >
> > My task is to distrubute even traffic over two leased lines.
> >
> > I know static will not do it. I don' think OSPF won't either.
>
> Actually, we have been able to do this with static routing for some of our
> frame relay clients where (because of mileage charges) it's been cheaper
> for them to do multiple 56K links instead of a T1.
>
> Here is an example of two load balanced 56K links which happen to go out
> from us on one frame-relay T1 using sub-interfaces (some addresses hidden
> for customer's privacy):
>
> interface Serial1.3 point-to-point
> description customer 56K link 1
> ip address nnn.nnn.115.1 255.255.255.252
> no ip mroute-cache
> no ip route-cache
> bandwidth 56
> frame-relay interface-dlci 20 IETF
> !
> interface Serial1.4 point-to-point
> description customer 56K link 2
> ip address nnn.nnn.115.5 255.255.255.252
> no ip mroute-cache
> no ip route-cache
> bandwidth 56
> frame-relay interface-dlci 26 IETF
>
> We use /30's for the point to point interfaces.
>
> To get the load balancing, you put static routes in using the interface
> name instead of the destination IP address to route to our customer's /24
> (nnn.nnn.156.0):
>
> ip route nnn.nnn.156.0 255.255.255.0 Serial1.4
> ip route nnn.nnn.156.0 255.255.255.0 Serial1.3
>
> http://tb.ior.com/mrtg/shared.html is a simple web page I just created
> that shows the traffic for each of the sub-interfaces above so you can see
> that the load is truly shared.
>
> > I don't think iBGP does it?
> >
> > any suggestions....
> >
> >
> > thnx in adv.
> >
> > tatsuya
>
> David.Schmidt@ior.com Internet Ventures, Inc. (509)622-2878 x238
>
> Direct Public Offerings (DPOs) are the future for investors.
> Visit http://www.perki.net to learn more about IVI and its DPO.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:13:15 EDT