Per packet vs per flow routing

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by R Siffredi, Mar 22, 2005.

  1. R Siffredi

    R Siffredi Guest

    I have a question regarding OSPF and how it would handle routing between two T1's by default.
    Is it going to per packet load balance between the T1's OR per flow choose which T1 to utilize for a given flow?

    How do I set this to per flow if no the default.

    Tx
     
    R Siffredi, Mar 22, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. R Siffredi

    thrill5 Guest

    On Cisco, the default is per flow regardless of your routing protocol.

    Scott

    "R Siffredi" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I have a question regarding OSPF and how it would handle routing between
    >two T1's by default.
    > Is it going to per packet load balance between the T1's OR per flow choose
    > which T1 to utilize for a given flow?
    >
    > How do I set this to per flow if no the default.
    >
    > Tx
    >
     
    thrill5, Mar 23, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. R Siffredi

    R Siffredi Guest

    But what will happen on per flow if one of the T1's fills up with
    traffic, is there a way it would know to switch to other T1?

    Should I c onsider a ppp multilink?


    On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 19:54:42 -0500, "thrill5" <>
    wrote:

    >On Cisco, the default is per flow regardless of your routing protocol.
    >
    >Scott
    >
    >"R Siffredi" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>I have a question regarding OSPF and how it would handle routing between
    >>two T1's by default.
    >> Is it going to per packet load balance between the T1's OR per flow choose
    >> which T1 to utilize for a given flow?
    >>
    >> How do I set this to per flow if no the default.
    >>
    >> Tx
    >>

    >
     
    R Siffredi, Mar 23, 2005
    #3
  4. R Siffredi

    Hansang Bae Guest

    R Siffredi wrote:
    > But what will happen on per flow if one of the T1's fills up with
    > traffic, is there a way it would know to switch to other T1?


    No. No routing protocol exists that takes load into account. Yes,
    EIGRP *can* use it as a metric, but it's zeroed out by default. Why do
    you suppose that is? The ability to detect congested links and react
    to it intelligently is quite challenging from a routing perspective.


    > Should I c onsider a ppp multilink?



    That's one way to solve it if you have CPU to spare.

    --

    hsb


    "Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
    **************************ROT13 MY ADDRESS*************************
    Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
    reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
    ********************************************************************
     
    Hansang Bae, Mar 23, 2005
    #4
  5. R Siffredi

    R Siffredi Guest

    Is there another way to solve it?

    Tx


    On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 04:49:16 GMT, "Hansang Bae" <>
    wrote:

    >R Siffredi wrote:
    >> But what will happen on per flow if one of the T1's fills up with
    >> traffic, is there a way it would know to switch to other T1?

    >
    >No. No routing protocol exists that takes load into account. Yes,
    >EIGRP *can* use it as a metric, but it's zeroed out by default. Why do
    >you suppose that is? The ability to detect congested links and react
    >to it intelligently is quite challenging from a routing perspective.
    >
    >
    >> Should I c onsider a ppp multilink?

    >
    >
    >That's one way to solve it if you have CPU to spare.
     
    R Siffredi, Mar 23, 2005
    #5
  6. R Siffredi

    thrill5 Guest

    Unless you have a single source/destination pair that needs more than a T1
    of bandwidth than flow based load balancing will be fine. If this won't
    work, than you can turn on per packet load balancing but it will cost you
    CPU cycles. If you have a low end router be careful. The reason load
    balancing defaults to per flow is because it is less CPU intensive and it
    works just fine 99% of the time.

    Scott

    "R Siffredi" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is there another way to solve it?
    >
    > Tx
    >
    >
    > On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 04:49:16 GMT, "Hansang Bae" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>R Siffredi wrote:
    >>> But what will happen on per flow if one of the T1's fills up with
    >>> traffic, is there a way it would know to switch to other T1?

    >>
    >>No. No routing protocol exists that takes load into account. Yes,
    >>EIGRP *can* use it as a metric, but it's zeroed out by default. Why do
    >>you suppose that is? The ability to detect congested links and react
    >>to it intelligently is quite challenging from a routing perspective.
    >>
    >>
    >>> Should I c onsider a ppp multilink?

    >>
    >>
    >>That's one way to solve it if you have CPU to spare.

    >
     
    thrill5, Mar 24, 2005
    #6
  7. R Siffredi

    R Siffredi Guest

    Unfortunately, it is a 3825 router and I have a voice and video
    requirement. This eliminates per packet load balance. The endpoints
    are vpn devices, so it is all single source/dest pair and I need at
    least 2Mbps of the bandwidth. The only option then is ppp multilink.
    Correct?

    Thanks for your help

    On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:50:03 -0500, "thrill5" <>
    wrote:

    >Unless you have a single source/destination pair that needs more than a T1
    >of bandwidth than flow based load balancing will be fine. If this won't
    >work, than you can turn on per packet load balancing but it will cost you
    >CPU cycles. If you have a low end router be careful. The reason load
    >balancing defaults to per flow is because it is less CPU intensive and it
    >works just fine 99% of the time.
    >
    >Scott
    >
    >"R Siffredi" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Is there another way to solve it?
    >>
    >> Tx
    >>
    >>
    >> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 04:49:16 GMT, "Hansang Bae" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>R Siffredi wrote:
    >>>> But what will happen on per flow if one of the T1's fills up with
    >>>> traffic, is there a way it would know to switch to other T1?
    >>>
    >>>No. No routing protocol exists that takes load into account. Yes,
    >>>EIGRP *can* use it as a metric, but it's zeroed out by default. Why do
    >>>you suppose that is? The ability to detect congested links and react
    >>>to it intelligently is quite challenging from a routing perspective.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Should I c onsider a ppp multilink?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>That's one way to solve it if you have CPU to spare.

    >>

    >
     
    R Siffredi, Mar 24, 2005
    #7
  8. In article <>,
    thrill5 <> wrote:
    :Unless you have a single source/destination pair that needs more than a T1
    :eek:f bandwidth than flow based load balancing will be fine. If this won't
    :work, than you can turn on per packet load balancing but it will cost you
    :CPU cycles. If you have a low end router be careful. The reason load
    :balancing defaults to per flow is because it is less CPU intensive and it
    :works just fine 99% of the time.

    Unless, that is, you are using CeF -- modern CeF has little to no
    extra overhead to go per-packet. But if you are using flow caching
    instead of CeF, then per-packet balancing requires dropping down to
    process switching.
    --
    Studies show that the average reader ignores 106% of all statistics
    they see in .signatures.
     
    Walter Roberson, Mar 24, 2005
    #8
  9. R Siffredi

    Hansang Bae Guest

    R Siffredi wrote:

    > Is there another way to solve it?



    CEF is a smarter switching method common on all new gear. It uses
    source/destination IP among other things to create the flow.
    --

    hsb


    "Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
    **************************ROT13 MY ADDRESS*************************
    Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
    reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
    ********************************************************************
     
    Hansang Bae, Mar 24, 2005
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Everton
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,752
    Everton
    Dec 27, 2005
  2. v

    RTP packet flow

    v, Aug 6, 2006, in forum: VOIP
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,420
    Wolfgang S. Rupprecht
    Aug 7, 2006
  3. lfnetworking
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    4,960
    lfnetworking
    Aug 27, 2006
  4. stephen
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    678
    stephen
    May 2, 2008
  5. mediumkuriboh
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,534
    mediumkuriboh
    Feb 9, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page