Hi Gregg/All, Would the variance have any effect on the actual load balancing in that way? I was under the impression that the variance would allow the lesser route to be added to the routing table, but after that the variance would have no effect on the number of packets sent over each link. Not sure, but I have an interest in finding out, so I'm off to have a look.
My thoughts at the moment are that packets may be distributed across unequal routes due to the metrics of those routes, but that the variance would not matter whether it were 2 or 22, only that it allows the routes to be used. I'll get back to you when/if I find out. Gaz ""Gregg Malcolm"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have a question about variance that's been bugging me. I know that metric > based routing proto's (IGRP, EIGRP and OSPF) will not load balance across > unequal cost links by default. We must use that variance cmd. The variance > has a multiplier. 1 is equal cost. I assume that variance is done per > packet (as opposed to session). Is this true? If variance is set to 2 does > it mean 2 packets would be sent out high bandwidth link and 1 packet out the > low bandwidth link? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27896&t=27882 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
