[j-nsp] Unequal-Cost Load Balancing for OSPF

[Iftikhar Ahmed]

I have made a mistake.My fault, I am sorry for not explaining the question
properly on this wide-distribution. I knew it's not the
Juniper/Cisco/Nortel, it is OSPF which by design don't support Unequal-cost
load-balance.
I only wanted to know the best practices if ever on juniper products for
dealing/bring the traffic on unequal-cost links somthing like
route-taging/policies etc etc
Kindly, I am asking for plain OSPF,  no MPLS/other stuff :)





Regards
Iftikhar Ahmed



On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:56 AM, Arda Balkanay <ardabalkanay at gmail.com>wrote:

> OSPF only supports ECMP by design (Equal cost multipath).
>
> If you need unequal cost load balancing without EIGRP you will need an MPLS
> TE solution.
> All Juniper boxes running Junos perfectly support MPLS TE with load
> balancing.
> use several LSP's from the same source to the same destination with
> different bandwidths then see the loadbalance based on bandwith ratios that
> you've specified.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Masood Ahmad Shah
> <masood at nexlinx.net.pk>wrote:
>
> > OSPFv2 does not support unequal-cost load balancing.
> >
> > Well, there is a way to do that; For example A customer have three E1's
> to
> > a
> > remote site.  Two are p-t-p and the other channel off of a E3.  When you
> > add
> > E3; EIGRP choose E3, ignoring the other two E1's.  Using the variance
> > command you force EIGRP (Cisco) to utilize all three E1's.
> >
> > And now you could tune the OSPF metrics so that three paths would appear
> > equal (as Farhan pointed out) or you could use RIP, assuming that the hop
> > count to reach the destination on both links is the same. In either case
> > you
> > still have equal cost load balancing on two unequal links, which will
> > result
> > in wasted bandwidth at best and a bottleneck at worst.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Masood
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Farhan Jaffer
> > Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 12:59 PM
> > To: Iftikhar Ahmed
> > Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Unequal-Cost Load Balancing for OSPF
> >
> > No. And it's not Juniper, It is OSPF which does not support unequal cost
> > load balancing.
> >
> > EIGRP supports this behavior by variance factor.
> >
> > If EIGRP is open atandard (not Cisco proprietry) then Juniper will also
> > support the same feature for EIGRP.
> >
> > However you can use some tricks to justify your scenario.
> >
> >
> > Farhan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Iftikhar Ahmed
> > <iftikhar.khan at gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > Does Juniper support Unequal-Cost Load Balancing for OSPF, like the way
> > > cisco do for EIGRP with commands like variance & maximum-paths etc
> stuff?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Iftikhar Ahmed
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>