[nsp] per packet load balancing solution.

[Marcus Keane]

James,

You can do this by setting the costs explicitly on the interfaces so that the aggregate cost to the hub for one access router is the same between the direct route to the hub and through the other access router to the hub. 

Not sure what you mean with the redistribution of EIGRP into OSPF. If you just use EIGRP you can load-share but it won't be equally over the two paths. However, if you are familiar with OSPF, I would stick with it and not go down the EIGRP road.

I don't think per-packet load-balancing is a good idea, especially in this topology. Do you particularly need it to be this finely balanced? 
Hope this helps.
Marcus.


-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:jamhampton at toast.net] 
Sent: 27 March 2003 08:05
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net

WE have three routers connected via T1 serial links in a triangle,( a core router and two access routers) we are currently using ospf so that the link between the two access routers only comes up if either of the access routers loses its connection to the core router. I have been asked to set up per packet load sharing on one of the access routers, I don´t think this is possible with ospf when the two links have different costs?? What is the best way to accomplish this? Im thinking 1) get rid of ospf, use static or floating static routes. 2) use EIGRP unequal cost load balance and redistribute into ospf. Any suggestions?
Thanks

James Hampton, CCNP
Network Technician.
Service Spring Corp
4370 Moline Martin Rd.
Millbury OH 43447



_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/