Multilink T1's with ip cef
Hi folks, If you have three T1's coming from the same provider which go straight into one single router and between you and the provider, you guys are doing multigroup ppp with ip cef load balancing 'per packet'. Ultimately, do you have the same kind of inbound/outbound bandwidth in this scenario vs. the a fractional T3, committing at 4.5mbps ? Which one is better? Thanks, -Frank _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Multilink T1's with ip cef
is there a page where I can get more information on cef? I will look it up on google as well but any help is much appreciated! Thanks!! Sincerely, Chris Kolp > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Brian > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 11:01 PM > To: Frank Kim > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Multilink T1's with ip cef > > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Frank Kim wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > If you have three T1's coming from the same provider which > go straight > > into one single router and between you and the provider, > you guys are > > doing multigroup ppp with ip cef load balancing 'per > packet'. Ultimately, > > do you have the same kind of inbound/outbound bandwidth in > this scenario > > vs. the a fractional T3, committing at 4.5mbps ? Which one > is better? > > > their are pro's and cons. You hit a price point with T1's where it is > cheaper to go with frac t3's. You lose physical diversity > however, as one > cable cut and your dead with a single frac t3. If you don't watch it > though, chances are most of your T1's to the same provider > may be in the > same actual binder anyways, not really giving you as much > protection as > you may think > > In terms of packet forwarding and just raw thruput, i say its > not really > an issue. They are probably about the same. CEF is not too > intensive, > its quite efficient. Only problem with CEF is it is buggy as > hell. CEF > is the evil we all have a love / hate relationship with. > > Also, typically, per-packet CEF is ran up on standard hdlc > serial links > (parallel) to the same source/destination routers...its > not common to > have CEF combined with PPP multigroup. Most ISP's running > CEF are doing > so over just HDLC links. > > Brian > > > > > Thanks, > > -Frank > > > > _ > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --- > I'm buying used CISCO gear!! > email me for a quote > > Brian Feeny e:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > CCNP+Voice/ATM/Security p:318.222.2638x109 > CCDP f:318.221.6612 > Network Administrator > ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881) > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Multilink T1's with ip cef
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Christopher Kolp wrote: > is there a page where I can get more information on cef? > > I will look it up on google as well but any help is much appreciated! > cisco.com of course since its proprietary > Thanks!! > > Sincerely, > > Chris Kolp > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > Brian > > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 11:01 PM > > To: Frank Kim > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Multilink T1's with ip cef > > > > > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Frank Kim wrote: > > > > > Hi folks, > > > If you have three T1's coming from the same provider which > > go straight > > > into one single router and between you and the provider, > > you guys are > > > doing multigroup ppp with ip cef load balancing 'per > > packet'. Ultimately, > > > do you have the same kind of inbound/outbound bandwidth in > > this scenario > > > vs. the a fractional T3, committing at 4.5mbps ? Which one > > is better? > > > > > > their are pro's and cons. You hit a price point with T1's where it is > > cheaper to go with frac t3's. You lose physical diversity > > however, as one > > cable cut and your dead with a single frac t3. If you don't watch it > > though, chances are most of your T1's to the same provider > > may be in the > > same actual binder anyways, not really giving you as much > > protection as > > you may think > > > > In terms of packet forwarding and just raw thruput, i say its > > not really > > an issue. They are probably about the same. CEF is not too > > intensive, > > its quite efficient. Only problem with CEF is it is buggy as > > hell. CEF > > is the evil we all have a love / hate relationship with. > > > > Also, typically, per-packet CEF is ran up on standard hdlc > > serial links > > (parallel) to the same source/destination routers...its > > not common to > > have CEF combined with PPP multigroup. Most ISP's running > > CEF are doing > > so over just HDLC links. > > > > Brian > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > -Frank > > > > > > _ > > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --- > > I'm buying used CISCO gear!! > > email me for a quote > > > > Brian Feeny e:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > CCNP+Voice/ATM/Security p:318.222.2638x109 > > CCDPf:318.221.6612 > > Network Administrator > > ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881) > > > > _ > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --- I'm buying used CISCO gear!! email me for a quote Brian Feeny e:[EMAIL PROTECTED] CCNP+Voice/ATM/Security p:318.222.2638x109 CCDPf:318.221.6612 Network Administrator ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881) _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Multilink T1's with ip cef
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Frank Kim wrote: > Hi folks, > If you have three T1's coming from the same provider which go straight > into one single router and between you and the provider, you guys are > doing multigroup ppp with ip cef load balancing 'per packet'. Ultimately, > do you have the same kind of inbound/outbound bandwidth in this scenario > vs. the a fractional T3, committing at 4.5mbps ? Which one is better? their are pro's and cons. You hit a price point with T1's where it is cheaper to go with frac t3's. You lose physical diversity however, as one cable cut and your dead with a single frac t3. If you don't watch it though, chances are most of your T1's to the same provider may be in the same actual binder anyways, not really giving you as much protection as you may think In terms of packet forwarding and just raw thruput, i say its not really an issue. They are probably about the same. CEF is not too intensive, its quite efficient. Only problem with CEF is it is buggy as hell. CEF is the evil we all have a love / hate relationship with. Also, typically, per-packet CEF is ran up on standard hdlc serial links (parallel) to the same source/destination routers...its not common to have CEF combined with PPP multigroup. Most ISP's running CEF are doing so over just HDLC links. Brian > > Thanks, > > -Frank > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- I'm buying used CISCO gear!! email me for a quote Brian Feeny e:[EMAIL PROTECTED] CCNP+Voice/ATM/Security p:318.222.2638x109 CCDPf:318.221.6612 Network Administrator ShreveNet Inc. (ASN 11881) _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
