[c-nsp] Portchannel DCEF across different VIPS in 75xx

[Rodney Dunn]

One benefit I see is that your downtime for
the full PC would be less if you spread the
member links over VIPs in the event you have
a VIP crash and have SLCR enabled (single line-card
reload).  You will still see a very short drop
of traffic in the chassis while MEMD is recarved
but it's a lot lot less than having to do a CBUS
complex restart and reload the code to all the cards.

For those of you that don't have SLCR enabled please
enable it. /*plug*/

Rodney

On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 07:17:57AM -0500, Joe Maimon wrote:
> Hello All,
> 
> Is there any advantage or disadvantage to spreading members of an 
> ethernet portchannel across different vips?
> 
> So you would have an OC3 and a 2FE in VIP 0, a DS3 and 2FE in VIP 1 and 
> so on so forth.
> 
> Since portchannel members are limited to 4 would you be better off with 
> spreading 4 members of four VIPs even with 2FE, instead of only 2 VIPS?
> (One nice thing about port channels is their support for hot 
> reconfiguration of members)
> 
> I imagine that any answer would be very dependant on traffic pps 
> patterns. So assume heavy and largely targetting Ethernet adjancencies 
> in a few tier1 vlans and some tier2.
> 
> Would traffic from the OC3 to the portchannel be VIP only switched and 
> not touch the CBUS?
> 
> Could you construct this in such a way as to avoid switching over the 
> CBUS in favor over routing across a 3550 with a larger backplane? (10 
> OC3 and 2FE should quickly overwhelm the 75xx capacity)
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Joe
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/