[c-nsp] Re: [j-nsp] load balancing between multiple BGP links

[Alok]

except for the need of 2 sessions,

per packet makes sense..somehow...

a. how is a link between any 2 associations different from any end to end
associations... (given all protocols implement some flow control on
top)........
b. on a per node bases it still boils down to treating a bundle between 2
nodes as a single FA

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "sin" <sin at pvs.ro>
To: "Alok" <alokdube at hotpop.com>
Cc: <juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>; <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Re: [j-nsp] load balancing between multiple BGP links


> Alok wrote:
> > It isnt juniper in my case though but I just remebered the per packet
thing
> > when I ran into this with another vendor
> >
> > however, even link bandwidth via BGP , which i perhaps remember has been
> > there since 5.6 doesnt consider the "immediate util" at the time of
> > transmitting the packet....
> >
> > Perhaps "per packet" with BGP link bandwidth would be good infact  i
think..
> > .
> > or perhaps for flow based, flow setup based on "actual util at the time
of
> > setup".... though nothing still seems to beat per packet :-) with link
> > bandwidth i guess...
> >
>
> i know that with cisco you can setup an acl that can match even/odd ip
> addresses and then use that acl in a route map to distribute the traffic
> across two links to another bgp speaker (that in it's turn can do the
> same with the link back to you). this might be an option for you.
>