[c-nsp] load balancing EoMPLS on PE via multiple WAN links

[kostas anagnopoulos]

i agree but the problem is how do you load balance pseudowires
over the tunnels without the "prefered-path"

Kostas

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Dickinson [mailto:iand at eng.pipex.net]
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 7:38 PM
To: kostas anagnopoulos
Cc: Phil Bedard; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] load balancing EoMPLS on PE via multiple WAN links


If you set up both TE tunnels with the same TE-ID (same as LDP ID)
but with different explicit-paths down each OC3, this isn't an an issue.
preferred-path is perfect for this scenario, as long as you use TE.

Ian

kostas anagnopoulos wrote:
> not sure if a solution without the "preferred-path" will work because a
> pseudowire's destination address
> must always be the ldp id which is unique per box.
>
> Kostas
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: Phil Bedard [mailto:philxor at gmail.com]
>   Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 4:45 PM
>   To: kostas anagnopoulos
>   Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>   Subject: Re: [c-nsp] load balancing EoMPLS on PE via multiple WAN links
>
>
>   I did look at the pseudowire classes and that preferred-path attribute
did
> not seem to exist on the 7600s we are running.   Could just be a software
> revision issue.    Also we are currently are just using a LDP MPLS core
and
> no TE tunnels, although that doesn't mean we can't.    The other method
that
> looked perhaps simpler was to use two loopback addresses and just
statically
> route the destination address of the remote tunnel ends across each
specific
> OC3.   More elegant solution would be to use  FRF.16 or MLPPP with the two
> OC3s, but the OSM cards on one end do not seem to support doing that.
>
>   Phil
>
>
>
>   On 6/5/06, kostas anagnopoulos <kostas.anagnopoulos at oteglobe.net> wrote:
>     what about routing pseudowires over a separate te tunnel each
following
> a
>     different route
>
>     pseudo-class 1st-pseudowire
>     preferred-path Tunnel0-over-1stOC3
>
>     pseudo-class 2nd-pseudowire
>     preferred path Tunnel1-over-2ndOC3
>
>     regards
>     Kostas
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
>     [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of Phil Bedard
>     Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 9:50 PM
>     To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>     Subject: [c-nsp] load balancing EoMPLS on PE via multiple WAN links
>
>
>     This is on 7600s with Sup720-3B/PFC-3B
>
>     One side has an 8-port OC3 OSM, other side is FlexWAN with 2-port OC3
> PA.
>
>     We have a scenario where we have a PE router with GigE to customers
who
> do
>     EoMPLS to another router.  We're adding a large-bandwidth customer and
> the
>     current single OC3 circuit is not enough to accomodate their bandwidth
> so we
>     want to add another OC3.     We've been told that the EoMPLS will not
do
>     per-destination load balancing across the two OC3s.  What might be the
> best
>     solution to this problem without going to an OC12 trunk?   Forcing
> traffic
>     for the large bandwidth customer across the new OC3?
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     Phil
>     _______________________________________________
>     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/
>

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.




-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.