For those of you following this:
I tried turning route caching off on the T1s and just using the "ip cef" and
"load-balancing per-packet" commands, but that didn't work. My CPU started
climbing back into the 30% range and when I did a show run the router had
automatically added "no ip route-cache cef" and "no ip route-cache" as if
they were two separate things.
I wasn't able to get it to fast-switch without the route-cache command and I
couldn't get it to take "ip route-cache cef" without also removing the
regular "no ip route-cache" command.
I never did get true packet-by-packet load balancing across the 3 T1s. It
seemed like turning off route-caching turned off CEF for that interface and
it went back to process switching. But, with it turned on the load was
spread across the 3 T1s, but not equally.
I'll probably have to ask our Cisco SE why the 'load-balance per-packet'
doesn't seem to be working like we would expect it to.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Fountain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: CEF/dCEF [7:7330]
>
>
> No, it isn't exactly packet by packet. Supposedly you can get packet by
> packet, but I haven't yet.
>
> After turning CEF we configured the interfaces for "ip route-cache cef"
and
> "ip load-balancing packet-per-packet"
>
> There are 3 T1s on that guy, and last time a looked the loads were 2/255,
> 5/255, and 8/255.
>
> I'm thinking maybe if we used the load balancing command with "no ip
> route-cache" instead of the "route-cache cef" command it might be a little
> more even.
>
> This is a new turn-up so we're still playing. I might try turning off
> caching but leave CEF on and see what happens.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chuck Larrieu"
> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 11:24 AM
> Subject: RE: CEF/dCEF [7:7330]
>
>
> > Idle curiousity - are you getting true "packet by packet" load sharing?
Or
> > conversation by conversation?
> >
> > i.e. is your traffic balance 50-50 ( for two lines )? Or some other
> figure,
> > because traffic for particular destinations is dent out particular links
> due
> > to the route caching?
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
> Mike
> > Fountain
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 8:05 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: CEF/dCEF [7:7330]
> >
> > We use CEF on some of our 2600s so that we can do Packet-by-Packet
> > loadbalancing without having to process-switch every packet and burn up
> the
> > CPU
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "West, Karl"
> > To:
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 9:38 AM
> > Subject: CEF/dCEF [7:7330]
> >
> >
> > > To all:
> > >
> > > I understand the features that CEF/dCEF provide for high end VIP based
> > > routers. I know the 3600's and 2100's has CEF options in their IOS,
what
> > > would running CEF on these platforms benefit me?
> > >
> > > Karl
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=7522&t=7330
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
