[j-nsp] LACP Load Balance

[Mohammad Khalil]

I have small question , should i implement this on family mpls as well ?

Router# show interfaces ae1
flexible-vlan-tagging;
mtu 1600;
encapsulation flexible-ethernet-services;
aggregated-ether-options {
    lacp {
        active;
    }
}
unit 0 {
    family bridge {
        interface-mode trunk;
        vlan-id-list [ 14 114 204 104 214 ];
    }
}
unit 10 {
    vlan-id 10;
    family inet {
        address 10.0.0.17/30;
    }
    family iso;
    family mpls;
}

And this should be done on both sides ?
BR,
Mohammad

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 10:11 AM, apurva modh <modh.apurva at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> You will not require symmetrical hashing. Just configure,
>
> set forwarding-options hash-key family inet layer-3
> set forwarding-options hash-key family inet layer-4
>
> Regards,
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Mohammad Khalil <eng.mssk at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi , Thanks all for the replies
>> Regarding the version
>> Router# run show version
>> Hostname: Router
>> Model: mx240
>> JUNOS Base OS boot [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Base OS Software Suite [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Kernel Software Suite [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Crypto Software Suite [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Packet Forwarding Engine Support (M/T Common) [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Packet Forwarding Engine Support (MX Common) [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Online Documentation [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Voice Services Container package [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Border Gateway Function package [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Services AACL Container package [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Services LL-PDF Container package [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Services Stateful Firewall [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS AppId Services [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS IDP Services [10.0R3.10]
>> JUNOS Routing Software Suite [10.0R3.10]
>>
>> Should i configure something like the below?
>> set forwarding-options hash-key family inet symmetric-hash
>>
>> How does the router know which ae group will apply to ?
>> In my case its ae0 and ae1
>>
>> Thanks in advance for the great help
>>
>> BR,
>> Mohammad
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Stefan Fouant <
>> sfouant at shortestpathfirst.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Also, you need to send a sizable number of flows to effect a proper
>> > distribution. A handful of flows is just not going to cut it, based on
>> the
>> > below mentioned hash.
>> >
>> > Stefan Fouant
>> > JNCIE-SEC, JNCIE-SP, JNCIE-ENT, JNCI
>> > Technical Trainer, Juniper Networks
>> >
>> > Follow us on Twitter @JuniperEducate
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPad
>> >
>> > On Aug 28, 2012, at 3:32 AM, Julien Goodwin <jgoodwin at studio442.com.au>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > On 28/08/12 17:20, Mohammad Khalil wrote:
>> > >> I am trying to make load balancing on the links as I checked the
>> traffic
>> > >> and its not balanced
>> > >> Any ideas will be highly appreciated
>> > >
>> > > Depending on what traffic you're sending it may not be evenly hashable
>> > > across the links.
>> > >
>> > > Depending on which side is uneven you might find help in:
>> > >
>> > > EX:
>> > >
>> >
>> http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=KB22943&smlogin=true
>> > >
>> > > MX:
>> > >
>> >
>> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.3/topics/concept/layer-2-services-load-balancing-and-link-aggregation.html
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Julien Goodwin
>> > > Studio442
>> > > "Blue Sky Solutioneering"
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > 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
>>
>
>