> Per-packet load balancing is one of two options; the other being "adaptive". > > Adaptive was meant to fix the actual problem we are using per-packet to > solve, which is cases where spray of packets across the member links is > unequal. The adaptive mode was developed to dynamically realize and fix > this. Unfortunately, it doesn't work when the payload does not lend > itself well to LACP hashing. > > So per-packet mode to the rescue. > > By the way, only supported on routers (confirmed on MX Trio, as it's > all we have). Not supported on the EX switches (which doesn't matter, > as those do a good job of LACP hashing, since the payload is > predictable). > > I've asked Cisco to develop a similar capability, as it would make a > world of difference in our environment, technically and commercially.
What you can do on the 9k is manual hash shifting [1], but if the underlying hash sucks, it won't really solve your issue I guess. Lukas [1] https://supportforums.cisco.com/document/111291/asr9000xr-loadbalancing-architecture-and-characteristics#polar _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
