[c-nsp] T1 Bonding with PA-MC-T3

[David Coulson]

Gregory Boehnlein wrote:
> 	Is there any specific reason why you need MLPPP? How about just
> using per-packet load balancing? We do that on our PA-MC-T3 via the
> following:
>   
I believe MLPPP handles fragmentation better than CEF load sharing, so 
you end up with the fragments being received in the same order they were 
sent. Also, you have a single interface for handling QoS - I've honestly 
never really seen this as a major issue, since you can just run the same 
policy on all CEF balanced interfaces, but I'm sure someone can point 
out a reason.

I had more problems with voice doing MLPPP versus CEF, but maybe I was 
doing it wrong...