hi Andy,
Thanks for the detailed email. However i could get a better understanding if u 
can send me configuration snapshot. My intended traffic will use MPLS in the 
future but for time being i need to know if i can deploy GRE tunnels to 
compensate for OSPF unequal cost paths and then try load-balancing my pure IP 
traffic.

regards,
HA

Andy Lamontagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Hamid,

To control (or engineer) where you want traffic to go, you simply introduce 
MPLS LSPs.  The beauty of MPLS is its Traffic Engineering characteristics.  You 
can decide EXACTLY where you want your traffic to go.  So, if you have 2 
unequal paths, and you wish to load-balance between the 2, you simply need make 
the "more expensive" path appear to be "less expensive", by creating those 
Label Switched Paths (LSPs). 

For example.

Let us say that you have 3 routers connected in series (Router A, B and C) and 
that all links are GigabitEthernet.  Router A also has a direct path to Router 
C (also GigabitEthernet) - see ascii diagram below: 

Router A ------ Router B ------ Router C
   |------------------------------------------|

Now, with default settings, the "shortest" path from Router A is the direct 
link to Router C.  The other link from Router A through Router B, then Router C 
is also a valid path, but at a higher "cost".  We have 2 unequal paths from 
Router A to Router C. 

You are looking to load balance between these 2 paths.

To do so, you create an RSVP Signaled LSP from Router A to Router C (RSVP so 
that you can "force" the path of the LSP to use Router B as opposed to going 
directly from Router A to Router C) 

When you create this new LSP, it appears in the routing table inet.3.  To be 
able to use this new "route" with OSPF, you must export it to the inet.0 
routing table.  Once the LSP is in inet.0, there will be 2 different, equal 
paths from Router A to Router C.  At this point, you follow Chris' config to do 
the load balancing and your good to go. 

You're on the right track when you the talk about using 2x GRE tunnels, but do 
this with MPLS instead.

I can still send you the config examples if you need it :-)

-Andy


 On Nov 8, 2007 11:39 AM, Hamid Ahmed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 Hi Andy,
  Thanks for your reply. 
  1) Can u send me a sample configuration of what u are saying with a brief 
explanation of your scenario?
  2) You are giving the explanation for equal cost paths. However in my case 
there are two unequal cost paths. So my question still how can u do that in 
using unequal cost paths ? 
  3) Please explain when u say the following:
  "What you will need to do is create 2 different RSVP Signaled LSPs
 towards the router which you want to "add more traffic", then you need to  
export these 2 LSPs in OSPF (not turn OSPF off!) so that the routing protocol  
can see and use these 2 new paths. In the end, you will have 2 equals paths 
going in 1 direction, and a 
 single path in the other.  If you need to move more traffic, then simply add a 
 3rd, 4th, etc LSP."

  4) The above discussion is for when we are doing work within MPLS. Now  in my 
case my intended traffic (Voice) does not use MPLS(however MPLS is enabled but 
for some other traffic like sigtran and O/M). OSPF is there as IGP and i need 
to load balance my intended traffic using the unequal cost path. I have an idea 
taht i create 2 x static GRE tunnels from one end to the other. My question can 
GRE tunnel override OSPF as that would be purely static routing and whatever 
goes with the tunnels would be just IP-payload. 
   
  regards,
  HA.


Andy Lamontagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


  Hi Hamid,

To expand on Chris's explanation, ECMP is Equal Cost Multi-Path, which allows 
for the use of 2 (or more) equal cost path at the same time; Load balancing the 
traffic between the different paths. As Chris also mentioned, this load 
balancing is done per flow and not per packet, so you  don't get any reordering 
of packets. 

What you will need to do is create 2 different RSVP Signaled LSPs towards the 
router which you want to "add more traffic", then you need to export these 2 
LSPs in OSPF (not turn OSPF off!) so that the routing protocol can see and use 
these 2 new paths.  

In the end, you will have 2 equals paths going in 1 direction, and a single 
path in the other.  If you need to move more traffic, then simply add a 3rd, 
4th, etc LSP.

Please let me know if you need further explanation/configuration samples.  

-Andy

  On 11/8/07, Hamid Ahmed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:    Hi,
  Its LAyer 3 load balancing. The traffic intended for  load-balancing does is 
on pure IP with OSPF running and having unequal cost paths 

  regards,
  Salman.

GAY Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
  Hi,

Which kind of load balancing do you want to do ? layer 3 ? layer 4 ?
Are you on a MPLS network ? 

Regards,
Samuel


Hamid Ahmed a écrit :
> Hi Everyone,
>
> CAn anyone suggest me how to load balancing between juniper routers for 
> unequal cost paths. 
>
> BR//
> HA
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>  http://mail.yahoo.com 
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>  https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list  juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net 
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


__________________________________________________ 
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list  juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp 



 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
 http://mail.yahoo.com 




 

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Reply via email to