Heiko, this seems like a configuration scheme to force load-balancing (if there is another link, or maybe between both B channels) through the links. This configuration shall be implemented on both sides (routers) to be effective. It works with any kind of interface (I guess), requiring only to be two or more routes with the same cost to a destination.
The command [no ip route-cache] means to the router not use route caching (wich process switch the first packet of the conversation, and then, fast/silicon/autonomous/etc switch the remaining ones) so that it will distribute the packets in a round-robin fashion between the available equal routes. The command [no ip mroute-cache] has the same effect over multicast packets. The [no fair-queue] disables fair-queueing on the interface so packets will be queued using FIFO strategy. please correct me anyone if I am mistaken :) Regards, Persio ----- Original Message ----- From: "Herold Heiko" To: Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 11:22 AM Subject: Ancient Isdn bri wisdom ? [7:40586] > Time ago when I first laid my greedy hands on a router with 11.something > without really knowing what I did somebody told me: > > interface bri x > no ip route-cache > no ip mroute-cache > no fair-queue > > and I followed the advice as a general rule. > > Now I tried to research the reason for that and really didn't find any. > Is that unneccessary ? > Should it be used (generally, except in special situations) anymore ? > Was that possibly just a workaround for a bug or particular problem which I > copied down and used (wrongly) whenever possible ? > > Heiko Herold > > -- > -- PREVINET S.p.A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Via Ferretto, 1 ph x39-041-5907073 > -- I-31021 Mogliano V.to (TV) fax x39-041-5907472 > -- ITALY Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40609&t=40586 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
