[c-nsp] EIGRP reality check

[Mark Tinka]

On Monday, November 25, 2013 04:55:08 AM Jeff Kell wrote:

> We have been using EIGRP in the most recent generation of
> our campus network, a choice that was largely made on
> the fact that it could load-share across equal-cost
> paths, and take the path of "least resistance" to the
> target.

I'm guessing you meant "unequal cost" :-).

Have you seen this:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/crs/software/crs_r4.3/routing/configuration/guide/b_routing_cg43xcrs_chapter_0101.html#concept_6F7168EEB2D343CCBA82BB223B311E7B

I haven't tried it, so don't know if it actually does what 
it says on the tin.

Anyone? Oli?

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20131127/3fcba0ff/attachment.sig>