«

Ok, thanks! I did not know that.

Doan

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004, M.C. van den Bovenkamp wrote:

> Doan wrote:
>
> > I don't think you can do load-sharing with static routes. You need to
> > use a routing protocol that support load sharing.
>
> Nope. Statics will load-share just fine.
>
> Regards,
>
> Marco.
>
>

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 00:03:03 GMT, "Ben" <> wrote:

>Hmmm...I am not aware of any configuration that will not work with CEF.
>Usually CEF is a requirement to get a lot of features to work.
>Maybe you could provide a config so we can look at this closer?
>
>By the way since per-destination load-sharing is the default, why not
>configure four /25 static routes instead of two /24s? That might give the
>desired effect...

It is possible that the router doesn't recognize the "ip cef" command.
It happend to me with image c1700-k9sy7-mz.122-15.T11.

Check out the Bug navigator and see what you can find.


Good luck.


Patrick


>"Captain" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 02:06:42 +0200, "M.C. van den Bovenkamp"
>> <> wrote:
>>
>> >Captain wrote:
>> >
>> >> I'm trying to load share on a Cisco3640.
>> >>
>> >> I tried the following, but all the packets
>> >> want to use the z.z.z.z connection only.
>> >>
>> >> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!
>> >> !
>> >> ip route x.x.x.0 255.255.255.0 z.z.z.z
>> >> ip route x.x.x.0 255.255.255.0 y.y.y.y
>> >> !
>> >> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!
>> >>
>> >> Is there not an easy way of telling the
>> >> packets to use BOTH gateways?
>> >
>> >It should do so by default, unless all your packets have the *exact*
>> >same destination. IOS does per-destination loadsharing by default when
>> >fast switching is enabled, so all packets for the same host will always
>> >take the same path.
>> >
>> ==================================================
>>
>> Yes, the exact same destination.
>>
>> ==================================================
>> >
>> >Two ways around this:
>> >
>> >Disable fast switching ('no ip route-cache'). And watch your router go
>> >into meltdown if you have serious traffic...
>> >
>> ==================================================
>>
>> I'm not sure what "serious traffic" is, but I would say YES, this
>> production router has a LOT of traffic on it!!
>>
>> ==================================================
>> >
>> >Run CEF ('ip cef') and run with 'ip load-sharing per-packet'.
>> >
>> ==================================================
>>
>> Do to the other configuration on this router,(which I'm trying not
>> to mess up), I can't seem to get 'ip load-sharing per-packet' to
>> do anything?
>>
>> ==================================================
>> >
>> >But the answer might be simpler than that. is the y.y.y.y route *in the
>> >routing table*? I.e. does it show up in 'show ip route'? Perhaps y.y.y.y
>> >isn't reachable for some reason, and the z.z.z.z route is the only one
>> >that actually works.
>> >
>> ==================================================
>>
>> Yes, both the yyyy and zzzz are there,(and working fine when
>> left on their own)....
>>
>> ==================================================
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Marco.
>>
>

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 15:10:04 +0200, "M.C. van den Bovenkamp"
<> wrote:

>Ben wrote:
>
>> Also many people forget this will only result in OUTBOUND traffic being
>> load-shared, unless you have same setup on the connected routers.
>
>Very true. But that wasn't how I read his problem, although it might be;
>depends on what he means by 'all the packets want to use the z.z.z.z
>connection only'.
>


Load-sharing seems to work from the other end, because when I
do a traceroute, packets go route1 the first time, route2 the second
time, route1 the third time,...., etc.....

But when I do a traceroute from the problem end, the first hop is
always the z.z.z.z route.

Also, every second ping,(on the traceroute after the z.z.z.z hop),
times out?!?!?! I assume it's because having load-sharing working
on one end and not on the other is causing this,(if that makes sense)?




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article <>,
(Captain) wrote:

> Load-sharing seems to work from the other end, because when I
> do a traceroute, packets go route1 the first time, route2 the second
> time, route1 the third time,...., etc.....

If you do a traceroute from your end, you'll see the outbound path, not
the inbound path.

--
Barry Margolin,
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

Barry Margolin <> wrote in message news:<barmar->...
> In article <>,
> (Captain) wrote:
>
> > Load-sharing seems to work from the other end, because when I
> > do a traceroute, packets go route1 the first time, route2 the second
> > time, route1 the third time,...., etc.....
>
> If you do a traceroute from your end, you'll see the outbound path, not
> the inbound path.


Are you issuing the trace route from the cisco device.?? If so Cisco will
send 3 UDP trace packets by default, also keep in mind that a packet
generated from the router is processed switched and does not use the CEF
path.

If you can post your routing table and also a sh ip cef sum and sh ip cef
z.z.z.z internal, do this for all path you wanna use.

D

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 06:53:16 -0400, Barry Margolin
<> wrote:

>In article <>,
> (Captain) wrote:
>
>> Load-sharing seems to work from the other end, because when I
>> do a traceroute, packets go route1 the first time, route2 the second
>> time, route1 the third time,...., etc.....
>
>If you do a traceroute from your end, you'll see the outbound path, not
>the inbound path.


I have access to both ends,(and have just rechecked it), load-sharing
going one way is working the way it should, but going the other way
no loadsharing!

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 02:06:42 +0200, "M.C. van den Bovenkamp"
<> wrote:

>Captain wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to load share on a Cisco3640.
>>
>> I tried the following, but all the packets
>> want to use the z.z.z.z connection only.
>>
>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!
>> !
>> ip route x.x.x.0 255.255.255.0 z.z.z.z
>> ip route x.x.x.0 255.255.255.0 y.y.y.y
>> !
>> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> Is there not an easy way of telling the
>> packets to use BOTH gateways?
>
>It should do so by default, unless all your packets have the *exact*
>same destination. IOS does per-destination loadsharing by default when
>fast switching is enabled, so all packets for the same host will always
>take the same path.
>
>Two ways around this:
>
>Disable fast switching ('no ip route-cache'). And watch your router go
>into meltdown if you have serious traffic...
>
>Run CEF ('ip cef') and run with 'ip load-sharing per-packet'.
>
>But the answer might be simpler than that. is the y.y.y.y route *in the
>routing table*? I.e. does it show up in 'show ip route'? Perhaps y.y.y.y
>isn't reachable for some reason, and the z.z.z.z route is the only one
>that actually works.
>
> Regards,
>
> Marco.


Ok, I "sort" of have it working, that is, it works for a few
moments, then the router appears to FORGET the routing,
(ie. no pings for a few moments), then full pings again?

What did I forget to set?