[j-nsp] Junos MPLS question

[Hannes Gredler]

per-packet does a per-packet hash analysis on which nexthop the packet
is forwarded to -> resulting in all packets belonging to the same flow
being relayed over the same next-hop;

-> per-packet is what i recommend to most customers;

/hannes

Mounir Mohamed wrote:
> Dear,
> 
> Which load balancing typ u use? per-packet or per-desination?
> 
> Best Regards,
> Mounir Mohamed
> 
> On 12/11/05, Sorin CONSTANTINESCU <consta at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>Hi,
>>
>>I have a setup like this:
>>
>>R1 -> R2 -> R3 ->R4
>>
>>- R1,R2 and R3 are in an MPLS Domain. R4 is outside.
>>- between R3 and R4 are 4 links (load-balanced)
>>- R1 - Cisco
>>- R2, R3, R4 - Juniper
>>
>>The goal of this setup is to have traffic from R1 (inside VRF) to go
>>to R4 ballanced on the 4 links between R3 and R4.
>>
>>I have configured a VRF in R1 and R3. In R3 i have a static default
>>route to inet.0. Unfortunatelly, i cannot redistribute it via MBGP to
>>R1, so i use 4 fake routes with qualified-next-hop, which are
>>redistributed in BGP. In R1, i route 0/0 towards the 4 next-hops
>>received earlier via MBGP.
>>
>>All is Ok, but sometimes i hit a bug on the cisco router, and traffic
>>is no-more ballanced, and all traffic from R1 to R4 goes only on one
>>link (instead of four).
>>
>>I tried routing one prefix (10.255.255.69, let's say) via 4
>>qualified-next-hops (assiociated with the 4 links). On R1, i have:
>>
>>  10.255.255.69/32 193.226.x.y nolabel/265056
>>                            193.226.x.y nolabel/265056
>>
>>On the R3, i have:
>>
>>=== cut here ===
>>adonay at R3> show route label 265056
>>
>>mpls.0: 86 destinations, 86 routes (86 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>>+ = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both
>>
>>265056             *[VPN/170] 3d 14:49:40
>>                     to x.x.x.x via so-0/1/0.0, Pop
>>                     to x.x.x.x via so-0/1/1.0, Pop
>>                   > to x.x.x.x via so-0/1/2.0, Pop
>>                     to x.x.x.x via so-0/1/3.0, Pop
>>
>>adonay at R3>
>>=== and here ===
>>
>>Although it looks very good, when tested, traffic is not load-balanced
>>across the 4 links, but goes out one of them only.
>>
>>
>>Any help is greatly appreciated.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>PS: I have opened a case with JTAC a few days ago, bot no luck yet.
>>--
>>Sorin CONSTANTINESCU
>>JNCIS-M, CCNP
>>consta at gmail.com
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp