[c-nsp] More missing Catalyst access features (was VLAN MAP)

[Jeff Kell]

While I'm thinking about it <grin> I have another current design issue... load sharing.

You need to interconnect two buildings with loads of traffic and can't afford 10G, so you're looking at multiple uplinks.  Specifically for this case it's a DR backup site, so a "very finite" number of servers, typically concentrated on the backup hosts and tape libraries.

We don't really want a L2 solution, but if we did, etherchannel is an option.

Of the L3 choices, would scales best on what platforms?  6500/7600 out of the immediate budget.

Etherchannel may not distribute the traffic adequately across the pipe, especially with the small number of target addresses, but I suppose there are tweaks to be made (open to suggestions).

L3 equal-cost load-sharing routes with per-packet seems ideal, but does it scale at these speeds?  Traditionally that is directed at bundled serial lines or slower media.

But per-packet seems to be a lost cause anyway, as the 3750s we just received informed us:

> Switch(config-if)#ip load-sharing ?
>   per-destination  Deterministic distribution
>   <cr>

Ooops, no per-packet choice anyway.  Same for 4500s.

The 3550/3560s claim to:

> Dorm-3550(config-if)#ip load-sharing ?
>   per-destination  Deterministic distribution
>   per-packet       Random distribution

but are they just blowing smoke, since the 3750s don't?

Jeff