The far router needs no concept of CEF to receive the packets equally over the three T1's though it would be preferred that the ISP router also load balance since most customers Internet connections receive more than they send.
Dave James Willard wrote: > > Right, the remote router must also have ip cef capability. The cisco > equipment was assumed since this is a Cisco group :). In case of no Cisco > equipment on the far end, you can always just use static default routes as a > previous post suggested. It will, however, not give you true load balancing. > > James > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Hartnell, George" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 4:38 PM > Subject: RE: Aggregate 3 T1's would this work. [7:33599] > > > Would this not also be a function of just what the ISP has/wants on the > far > > end? > > > > My hookup uses a 3Com Accessbuilder 6100 I-Mux --- HSSI---Cisco 7200. The > > three T1's are inverse multiplexed on the 3Com. Scaleable to 7 T1's. > > > > 'Couse this is a 'Cisco' newsgroup.... > > > > Best, G. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: James Willard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 12:33 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Aggregate 3 T1's would this work. [7:33599] > > > > > > > > > John, > > > > > > What you want to look at is Cisco Express Forwarding (CEF). > > > It allows load > > > balancing across multiple T1's. For each serial interface you > > > would have > > > your own subnet (such as a /30) to your provider, because the serial > > > interfaces cannot be on the same subnet. Turn on CEF using > > > "ip cef" globally > > > (you may want to ensure you have a recent IOS, as CEF was > > > buggy early on). > > > Then, on each serial interface, issue either "ip load-sharing > > > per-packet" or > > > "ip load-sharing per-destination" depending on how you want the load > > > distributed. To give you the full 4.5Mbps to any one site, > > > use per-packet > > > load balancing. > > > > > > James Willard, CCNA > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > > John Jones > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 3:17 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Aggregate 3 T1's would this work. [7:33599] > > > > > > > > > I have a configuration question. > > > I have 3 dedicated T1's a router 3620 with three T1 CSU/DSU and one > > > FastEthernet ports installed. All dedicated T's are from the same ISP. > > > I want to aggregate the three T1's for increased bandwidth (4.5 Mbps) > > > Would I run into issues > > > > > > Here is my config. Would this work? > > > > > > > > > ! > > > hostname Cisco3620 > > > ! > > > ! > > > no ip name-server > > > ! > > > ip subnet-zero > > > no ip domain-lookup > > > ip routing > > > ! > > > interface Ethernet 0/0 > > > no description > > > ip address 172.16.10.1 255.255.255.0 > > > ! > > > interface Serial 0/0 > > > no shutdown > > > ip address 1.1.1.2 255.255.255.248 > > > ! > > > interface Serial 0/1 > > > no shutdown > > > ip address 1.1.1.3 255.255.255.248 > > > ! > > > interface Serial 1/0 > > > no shutdown > > > ip address 1.1.1.4 255.255.255.248 > > > ! > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 serial0/0 > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 serial0/1 > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 serial1/0 > > > > > > ! > > > ! > > > ip classless > > > no ip http server > > > ! > > > end > > > > > > > > > I tried this config with Cisco's config maker and I get IP > > > address errors on > > > the serial ports, specifically being on the same subnet. > > > Would this do basic aggregation? -- David Madland Sr. Network Engineer CCIE# 2016 Qwest Communications Int. Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 612-664-3367 "Emotion should reflect reason not guide it" Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33617&t=33599 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
