[c-nsp] Per Packet vs Per Destination Load Balancing

Christopher McCrory chrismcc at pricegrabber.com
Sat Oct 23 19:34:13 EDT 2004


On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 17:21, Chris Strandt wrote:
> Is there a performance impact or limitation with per destination load 
> balancing?
> It seems to me that with per destination, IOS has to keep track of the 
> source/destination pair.  Will this slow forwarding, or can this 
> negativly impact a router forwarding a DDOS attack?

(not quite answering you question, but giving you another data point) 

>From my experience (all of a week:) with balancing two T1 lines (ospf
+cef).  With per-packet; any traffic can use all the bandwidth.  With
per-destination; when one link is saturated, new traffic does _not_ tend
to migrate to the other less used circuit.  On a 2620, I didn't notice
any significant cpu usage either way.

> Thanks,
> -Chris

Christopher McCrory
 "The guy that keeps the servers running"
chrismcc at pricegrabber.com
Let's face it, there's no Hollow Earth, no robots, and
no 'mute rays.' And even if there were, waxed paper is
no defense.  I tried it.  Only tinfoil works.

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list