Is there a reason you are not just doing per-flow? Have you looked at running LACP? Doing per-packet as you mention sometimes causes problems with the end hosts if they have a poorly behaving IP stack, or low buffering. It also creates extra work for the hosts.
You can change the hashing system for LACP to perform differently based on your requirements (and platform). Knowing more about your setup will help provide a better recommendation. I would leave per-packet as a last resort in almost any environment. - Jared On Apr 4, 2011, at 10:32 AM, arulgobinath emmanuel <arulg...@gmail.com> wrote: > HI, > When trying to load balance through 2 Ethernet paths (jitter 4ms - 10ms and > delay 10ms) using per packet load sharing severely impact the throughput. > (eg per path 90Mbps but when enabling both paths 30mbps ) . I suspect the > issue due to the out of order packet. Is there any way similar to MLPPP that > can handle the out of order packet in Ethernet environment. > > Thanks in advance. > Gobinath. > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
