[c-nsp] Handling Out of order packet

[arulgobinath emmanuel]

Thanks All,
the setup involved

                                             Fa1/0    -------------Wireless
Bridge          ||       Wireless Bridge ----------- fa0/0
End Host----ROUTER
1
ROUTER 2   ---------- End Host ( Windows 7)
                                              fa1/1   ------------Wireless
Bridge           ||         Wireless Bridge ------------- fa0/1

end host connected to router (Cisco 2821) and hwic port connects to  two
wireless bridges same setup replicated other end. Since the wireless
physical media cause the jitter & delay .  If its pure Ethernet may be the
out of order packet rate  less.

I'm not using per flow because there are less number of hosts hence unable
to archive required throughput.  I've tried etherchannel(Pagp )but the same
issue since the traffic shared using flow based.  Afterwards i've replaced
switch with router to do the per packet load sharing .

Since the per packet load sharing can cause some out of order packet i'm
looking into  options(tunneling ? )  which provide some buffering in the
router which regulates the traffic.  Except IPS feature no other solutions
yet .

Thanks again.
Gobinath.



On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:42 AM, Jared Mauch <jared at puck.nether.net> wrote:

> See below
>
> Jared Mauch
>
> On Apr 4, 2011, at 4:27 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
>
> > On 04/04/2011 15:42, Jared Mauch wrote:
> >> Is there a reason you are not just doing per-flow?  Have you looked at
> >> running LACP?
> >
> > LACP is orthogonal to the hashing algorithm.
>
> The hardware hashing does per flow only, so it is related :-) I've never
> seen hardware that does anything but at least.
>
>
> >
> >> I would leave per-packet as a last resort in almost any environment.
> >
> > I have seen per-packet cause performance gain, but only in extremely
> distressed circumstances.  You're right that it should generally be
> disabled, because it causes all sorts of trouble.
> >
>
> True, but the topology sounds like diverse paths being used for load
> sharing vs redundancy. Lacp fast mode can help here too depending on the
> platform.
>
> Without knowing more it's hard to tell. But it sounds like an Ethernet
> topology and the 802.3 tools may help here.
>
>
> > Nick
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>