North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: critique of NANOG meeting
> Load balancing is a funny stuff. Its utility is very limited > by the fact that you've got to keep packets in sequence to > avoid triggering TCP fast retransmits. > > I.e. with ciscos you can only do load-balancing on paths > (i.e. load one circuit with traffic to ISP A and another to ISP B > etc) or on destination networks (that has a potential of causing > very skewed load distribution). I admit I'm not familiar with the impact of 'ip route-caching' tens of thousands of equal-cost paths at dual-HSSI speed. I was told by some at Cisco that it wouldn't be a problem. > Before i left Sprint i produced a plan for them to increase > capacity at least four-fold using combination of load balancing > and hot-potato intra-backbone routing. Going to OC-3s is > a lot simplier, though :) True, it's simpler - but one does what one needs to do to stay alive. Or one should, at least :) > --vadim Avi - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|