From: Ivan (ivan@iip.net)
Date: Thu Nov 23 2006 - 09:17:40 ART
One more joke !
Router#sh run
*Nov 23 14:31:23.825: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by console| b
router odr
router odr
traffic-share min across-interfaces
!
On Thursday 23 November 2006 15:05, cadet wrote:
> Hi Ivan!
> THANK YOU FOR ANSWER, but I know this theory :)
> But what do you think about:
>
> r4(config-router)#router rip
> r4(config-router)#traffic-share min ?
> across-interfaces Use different interfaces for equal-cost paths
>
>
>
> r4#sh ver
> Cisco IOS Software, C2600 Software (C2600-ADVENTERPRISEK9-M), Version
> 12.4(3b), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc3) Technical Support:
> http://www.cisco.com/techsupport
>
> System image file is "flash:c2600-adventerprisek9-mz.124-3b.bin"
>
> Cisco 2611XM (MPC860P) processor (revision 0x100) with 126441K/4631K bytes
> of memory.
>
> > RIP doesn't support unequal cost load-balancing therefore this command
> > doesn't play any role in routing process.
> > This command can be used in EIGRP routing process. If exist more than one
> > path to destination with different cost, EIGRP can use equal or unequal
> > load-balancing. Enabling unequal loadbalancing can be done variance
> > command. After that once you have more than one path with different
> > capacity, routing proccess can distribute traffic across this links. If
> > you also use traffic-share min accross-link. Then traffic wil flow across
> > less cost link.
> >
> > In your case load balancing achieved not with routing proccess but with
> > packet switching process. Here you use CEF or process switching models.
> > Only this two models can do per-packet load-sharing.
> >
> > Statistic for packet switching you can see "sh int stats".
> >
> > On Thursday 23 November 2006 13:52, cadet wrote:
> >> Hi All !
> >> I need help with RIP traffic-share min across-interfaces !
> >>
> >> I have next topology:
> >>
> >> fa0/0 sw1 (L3)
> >> R1-- R2 -- ---- R4
> >> fa0/1 sw2 (L3)
> >>
> >> Routing protocol - rip
> >> R4 have lo0 14.14.4.4
> >> I need load-balanced in rip
> >>
> >>
> >> r2#sh ip route 14.14.4.0
> >> Routing entry for 14.14.4.0/24
> >> Known via "rip", distance 120, metric 2
> >> Redistributing via rip
> >> Last update from 14.14.50.8 on FastEthernet0/1, 00:00:16 ago
> >> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> >> 14.14.50.8, from 14.14.50.8, 00:00:16 ago, via FastEthernet0/1
> >> Route metric is 2, traffic share count is 1
> >> * 14.14.40.7, from 14.14.40.7, 00:00:22 ago, via FastEthernet0/0
> >> Route metric is 2, traffic share count is 1
> >>
> >> R2:
> >>
> >> router rip
> >> version 2
> >> traffic-share min across-interfaces
> >> passive-interface default
> >> no passive-interface FastEthernet0/0
> >> no passive-interface Serial0/0
> >> no passive-interface FastEthernet0/1
> >> network 14.0.0.0
> >> no auto-summary
> >>
> >> I use command "traffic-share min across-interfaces"
> >>
> >> I create 2 ACL on fa0/0 R2 and R2 fa0/1 for test
> >>
> >> r2#sh access-lists
> >> Extended IP access list test
> >> 10 permit icmp any any log
> >> 20 permit ip any any
> >> Extended IP access list test2
> >> 10 permit icmp any any log
> >> 20 permit ip any any
> >>
> >> r2#sh run int fa0/0
> >> Building configuration...
> >>
> >> Current configuration : 149 bytes
> >> !
> >> interface FastEthernet0/0
> >> ip address 14.14.40.4 255.255.255.0
> >> ip access-group test out
> >> duplex auto
> >> speed auto
> >> end
> >>
> >> r2#sh run int fa0/1
> >> Building configuration...
> >>
> >> Current configuration : 150 bytes
> >> !
> >> interface FastEthernet0/1
> >> ip address 14.14.50.4 255.255.255.0
> >> ip access-group test2 out
> >> duplex auto
> >> speed auto
> >> end
> >>
> >>
> >> TEST 1 only traffic-share min across-interfaces:
> >>
> >> r1#ping 14.14.4.4 repeat 40
> >>
> >> Type escape sequence to abort.
> >> Sending 40, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 14.14.4.4, timeout is 2 seconds:
> >> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >> Success rate is 100 percent (40/40), round-trip min/avg/max = 28/36/128
> >> ms
> >>
> >>
> >> r2#sh access-lists
> >> Extended IP access list test
> >> 10 permit icmp any any log
> >> 20 permit ip any any
> >> Extended IP access list test2
> >> 10 permit icmp any any log (40 matches)
> >> 20 permit ip any any
> >>
> >> TEST 2 traffic-share min across-interfaces + ip load-sharing
> >> per-packet on interfaces fa0/0 and fa0/1:
> >>
> >> r1#ping 14.14.4.4 repeat 40
> >>
> >> Type escape sequence to abort.
> >> Sending 40, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 14.14.4.4, timeout is 2 seconds:
> >> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >> Success rate is 100 percent (40/40), round-trip min/avg/max = 28/36/128
> >> ms
> >>
> >>
> >> r2#sh access-lists
> >> Extended IP access list test
> >> 10 permit icmp any any log (20 matches)
> >> 20 permit ip any any
> >> Extended IP access list test2
> >> 10 permit icmp any any log (20 matches)
> >> 20 permit ip any any
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> So traffic-share min across-interfaces do not traffic-share between
> >> several interfaces ?
> >>
> >> Regards.
> >> Max
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
-- Ivan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 01 2006 - 08:05:48 ART