"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote: > It is an OSPF design principle. Essentially, current-generation > routing protocols (i.e., without traffic engineering) are incapable > of doing other than hop-by-hop load sharing, which may lead to > extremely poor end-to-end utilization. > > The IETF consensus is that when you need to optimize utilization, > conserve resources, etc., you need traffic engineering. Routing is > intended for topology discovery rather than traffic optimization. > > In other words, I consider, and I think most routing authorities > would agree, that the unequal cost load balancing of IGRP and EIGRP > really is a blind alley in protocol development.
Interesting. Thanks for that insight, Howard. And it makes sense because although I've played with it in the lab, I have never needed to configure EIGRP/IGRP unequal cost load balancing in the real world, nor even seen it configured. (Not that my experience is that wide.) I wonder if anyone can comment regarding how widespread is the use of EIGRP or IGRP unequal cost load balancing? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27356&t=27311 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
