Eigrp default metric = 256*(1000/path-minBW + sum(delays/10))
BW is in Kbps
-so the formula does work for up to 10G links
However when comparing 10G an 1G int on me3600 I see following delay
sh int g0/2
.. DLY 10 usec,
sh int te0/1
.. DLY 1000 usec
Say what? Hahaha :)
Do your interfaces
On Monday, November 25, 2013 04:55:08 AM Jeff Kell wrote:
We have been using EIGRP in the most recent generation of
our campus network, a choice that was largely made on
the fact that it could load-share across equal-cost
paths, and take the path of least resistance to the
target.
I'm
Actually, I would have entertained equal cost even without the unequal
variance options, but the latter would be even better.
To answer some other questions others have asked... back to the original
diagram...
+--A-\
| | \
| B---D
| | /
+--C-/
These are layer-2 paths. We have a rather
On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 05:21:45 AM Jeff Kell wrote:
These are all Catalysts (6500 at A, various 3750 models
at B-C-D) so nothing new and bleeding edge here.
I'll admit my EIGRP skills here suck a little; well, a lot,
sorry :-).
Maybe Gert or other Cisco EIGRP experts lurking can
Hi,
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 09:55:08PM -0500, Jeff Kell wrote:
From B to D there are three routes... direct to D (10G), via A to D
(10G), and via C to D (gig channel). And vice versa.
EIGRP shows the three paths as equal weight (Catalyst 3750s and 6500s on
current code) despite the
We have been using EIGRP in the most recent generation of our campus
network, a choice that was largely made on the fact that it could
load-share across equal-cost paths, and take the path of least
resistance to the target.
Recently we upgraded some core links to 10Gbps, with a couple remaining
