Timeline for How to aggregate multiple WAN interfaces (GE) together on Cisco Routers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 27, 2017 at 10:33 | vote | accept | Sayeed | ||
| Aug 18, 2016 at 1:51 | comment | added | OzNetNerd | It's unfortunate you have not learned anything. I'm not asking you to take my word for it, I'm simply asking you listen to Cisco's recommendations on their own equipment. The document you linked to clearly states: "Also, per-packet load balancing can result in out-of-sequence (OOS) packet delivery errors on some routers, which can cause applications such as VoIP to malfunction. Therefore, per-packet load balancing is not recommended." | |
| Aug 18, 2016 at 1:42 | comment | added | Ronnie Smith | My answer is right. I have not learned anything from this comment thread. Keep learning friend, we all need to keep learning. More documentation here, Configuring a Load-Balancing Scheme. | |
| Aug 18, 2016 at 1:20 | comment | added | OzNetNerd | While the router might be capable of doing, I'd still recommend staying away from it. As I mentioned above and as covered in this blog post - cisco2960.over-blog.com/2014/04/cef-and-load-sharing.html - "However, using Per-packet load sharing is not generally recommended, because it most commonly results in out-of-order packets, affecting TCP traffic throughput (since TCP will bother to fix the out-of-order) and UDP data loss (since UDP will not bother to fix the out-of-order) and to make things more scary out-of-order packets might be interpreted as an attack by firewalls." | |
| Aug 18, 2016 at 1:17 | comment | added | Ronnie Smith | Portable Product Sheets – Routing Performance ...As usual - I provide the only right answer, nail it, and get downvoted while bloviation gets upvoted. | |
| Aug 18, 2016 at 1:15 | comment | added | OzNetNerd | I'm not creating the FUD, I'm simply quoting Cisco's own documentation. My apologies, I did miss that line about CEF allowing it to be done more quickly - though the very next line says "However, it does imply that you have the extra resources to deal with maintaining CEF entries and adjacencies", so it is somethign that should be considered. The original document might be old, but at the top of the page it says "Updated:Jan 08, 2015" so think it's safe to say the information is still relevant. | |
| Aug 18, 2016 at 1:11 | comment | added | Ronnie Smith | @OzNetNerd I have experience configuring and testing basic load balancing in Cisco IOS. It's not rocket science, and the Fear, Uncertainty,& Doubt (FUD) you communicate here is unnecessary. The OP tells us he has 2951's with a pair of 8Mbps links, we know this platform supports 300 Mbps CEF switched and the 15 yr old article you cite actually says "Newer switching schemes such as Cisco Express Forwarding (CEF) allow you to do per-packet and per-destination load-balancing more quickly." | |
| Aug 17, 2016 at 3:07 | comment | added | OzNetNerd | "there is potential that the packets may arrive out of order at the destination because differential delay may exist within the network." This Cisco document (cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2033/…) also says "This ensures equal utilization of the links, but is a processor intensive task and impacts the overall forwarding performance. This form of per-packet load balancing is not well suited for higher speed interfaces." As I mentioned above, all thigns should be carefully considered before using this command. | |
| Aug 17, 2016 at 3:03 | comment | added | OzNetNerd | I strongly advise against the use of this command unless all things have been properly considered and the OP fully understands the implications of the command. I suggest you do the same Ron before suggesting others use it. For example, you say "Be sure to enable Cisco Express Forwarding, CEF" but the Cisco documentation (cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/border-gateway-protocol-bgp/…) says "enable process switching (or disable fast switching)". It also goes on to say "This can crash a low-end router because the CPU must do all the processing." Finally, it also says... | |
| May 18, 2016 at 23:54 | history | answered | Ronnie Smith | CC BY-SA 3.0 |