I meant 10^7
Regards, Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP Managing Partner / Sr. Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. Mailto: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] Telephone: +1.810.326.1444, ext. 208 Live Assistance, Please visit: <http://www.ipexpert.com/chat> www.ipexpert.com/chat eFax: +1.810.454.0130 IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand, Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at <http://www.ipexpert.com/communities> www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at <http://www.ipexpert.com/> www.ipexpert.com From: Tyson Scott [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 12:48 PM To: 'amit chopra'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; 'Marko Milivojevic' Subject: RE: EIGRP unequal cost load Did you go thru this blog. http://blog.ipexpert.com/2010/05/03/eigrp-unequal-cost-load-balancing/ Your numbers are a little off It should be 256 & 10^10 Regards, Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP Managing Partner / Sr. Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. Mailto: [email protected] Telephone: +1.810.326.1444, ext. 208 Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat eFax: +1.810.454.0130 IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand, Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at www.ipexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> From: amit chopra [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 12:22 PM To: [email protected]; [email protected]; Marko Milivojevic; Tyson Scott Subject: EIGRP unequal cost load Always an issue when it is come to calculation :) I watched VOD for EIGRP unequal cost load balacing and try to calculate FD by following formula Rack1R5#show ip eigrp topology 4.0.0.0 IP-EIGRP (AS 100): Topology entry for 4.0.0.0/8 State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 2 Successor(s), FD is 2297856 Routing Descriptor Blocks: 155.1.0.4 (Serial1/0.1), from 155.1.0.4, Send flag is 0x0 Composite metric is (2297856/128256), Route is Internal Vector metric: Minimum bandwidth is 1544 Kbit Total delay is 25000 microseconds Reliability is 255/255 Load is 1/255 Minimum MTU is 1500 Hop count is 1 To know how metric calculated on above output , I used following formula: a) 2.56 x 10^12 / BW (in bps) = 2.56 x 1000000000000 / 1544000 = 1658031.0880829015544041450777202 = 1658031 b) Delay : 2500 x 256 = 640000 Metric = a + b = 1658031 + 640000 = 2298031 Now as per output , The metric for 4.0.0.0 is 2297856 and if I subtract both metric it will come up 175 , not sure why it is not match exactly. The 4.0.0.0 prefix is advertise by router 4 : Rack1R4# sh ip eigrp topology 4.0.0.0 IP-EIGRP (AS 100): Topology entry for 4.0.0.0/8 State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 1 Successor(s), FD is 128256 Routing Descriptor Blocks: 0.0.0.0 (Loopback4), from Connected, Send flag is 0x0 Composite metric is (128256/0), Route is Internal Vector metric: Minimum bandwidth is 10000000 Kbit Total delay is 5000 microseconds Reliability is 255/255 Load is 1/255 Minimum MTU is 1514 Hop count is 0 Rack1R4# Please guys help
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
