At 8:52 PM -0400 5/3/02, Sean Knox wrote: >Correct me if I'm wrong, but VLAN priorization isn't really load balancing- >you are just forcing VLANS over a preselected path. It does not take into >consideration that one VLAN may utilize more bandwidth than another. > >Sean
Remember that the network designer is going to force VLANs over paths. The design should reflect actual traffic measurements, or at least estimates. This isn't a one-time decision. There should be regular utilization measurement and adjustments as indicated by measurement. > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >> MADMAN >> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 3:05 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265] >> >> >> Yes. An example would be two core 6500 trunked together. You have >> switches in the closets, one uplink to 6500A the other to 6500B. Set >> priority on even VLAN/s to A odd to B. >> >> Dave >> >> "Steven A. Ridder" wrote: >> > >> > Does anyone do any VLAN load balancing via STP in the real >> world? I've >> > never seen it yet, and am just curious if it's ever done. >> > >> > -- >> > >> > RFC 1149 Compliant. >> > Get in my head: >> > http://sar.dynu.com >> -- >> David Madland >> Sr. Network Engineer >> CCIE# 2016 >> Qwest Communications Int. Inc. >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> 612-664-3367 >> >> "Emotion should reflect reason not guide it" >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=43283&t=43265 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
