RE: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-06 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I second that.

Theo






Sean Knox 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
05/04/2002 09:52 AM
Please respond to Sean Knox

 
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc: 
Subject:RE: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]


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


 -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=7i=43454t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-04 Thread Brunner Joseph

Do mean if I have 2 6509 with MSFC2/PFC2's, I 
configure STP for say odd vlans to go to the first MSFC and EVEN
VLAN's to the SECOND MSFC ? This is done all the time.. read up on MISTP
on cco. Basically you map vlans to instances of spanning tree protocol
also you can use the older way of setting STP priority on a per vlan basis
for each vlan with round-robin vlan staggering on msfc's like (vlan 1
bridge-priority can be 1, on msfc 1 and 65000 on
vlan 2, and VICE VERSA for msfc 2)

check this doc

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat6000/sw_7_1/conf_gd/spantree.htm#xtocid2339718

Joseph Brunner
ASN 21572
MortgageIT MITLending
New York, NY 10038
(212) 651 - 7695 Voice



Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43271t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread Howard C. Berkowitz

At 5:04 PM -0400 5/3/02, 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.

Could you clarify a bit more what you are trying to do? 802.1D 
specifically picks a single path, which is the antithesis of load 
balancing.  Assigning multiple VLANs, each with their own STP, to 
different facilities...sure.




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43269t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread Larry Letterman

yes..we use load balancing, if you call it that, in data centers..

Larry Letterman
Cisco Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Steven A. Ridder 
To: 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 2:04 PM
Subject: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]


 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




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43267t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread MADMAN

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




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43268t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread Steven A. Ridder

--

RFC 1149 Compliant.
Get in my head:
http://sar.dynu.com


Howard C. Berkowitz  wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
 At 5:04 PM -0400 5/3/02, 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.

 Could you clarify a bit more what you are trying to do? 802.1D
 specifically picks a single path, which is the antithesis of load
 balancing.  Assigning multiple VLANs, each with their own STP, to
 different facilities...sure.

That's what I was talking about, I'm just curios to see how common it is.
Sounds like it's pretty common.




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43270t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread John Huston

Care to share those configs?


Larry Letterman  wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
 yes..we use load balancing, if you call it that, in data centers..

 Larry Letterman
 Cisco Systems
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 - Original Message -
 From: Steven A. Ridder
 To:
 Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 2:04 PM
 Subject: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]


  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




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43275t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread Sean Knox

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


 -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=7i=43278t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread Daniel Cotts

Dave has described the switch blocks as given in the BCMSM course. Further
details would be that the Distribution Layer 65xx switches would have
routing capability. They would also use HSRP on the VLANs so that each trunk
link to the Access Layer switches would be the primary for one set of VLANs
and the secondary for the other set. In case of a link failure all traffic
would failover to the remaining link. Each switch block is a unique VTP
domain. Traffic between switch blocks is routed.
HTH

 -Original Message-
 From: MADMAN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 5:05 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




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43279t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread Michael L. Williams

Yes... that's true it's not true load balancing but it let's call it
load sharing... =)

Actually, of the many things we consider load balancing, many aren't true
load balancing but a load sharing that under certain circumstances could be
equal like Etherchannel and EIGRP (and other routing protocols) load
balancing..  Even under the best configuration Etherchannel has to rely on
the source and/or destination MAC or IP addresses to determine which pipe
it takes, unless the statistics of IP and/or MAC addr distribution close to
random, Etherchannel isn't true balancing.  For equal-cost load
balancing with routing protocols, if you're using fast-switching, you only
get per-destination load balancing, not per packet.  To get per-packet load
balancing, you must disable fast switching (i.e. use process switching...
ewww)   So if you have a router at a remote site with two T1s back to
the home office where the server is, if most of your traffic is PCs talking
to the server, then all of that traffic to that server will choose one of
the two T1s (per-destination) and leave the other relatively unused unless
you enable process-switching..

(see http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/105/46.html)

It appears that CEF is an exception that can indeed do per-packet
load-balancing without a hit in performance (process switching) by
default it allows up to 4 paths (1 for BGP) but can be changed...

(see http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/ifaa/pa/much/tech/althb_wp.htm)
(watch for URL wrap)

As for Multilink PPP, I can't find any documentation on Cisco's site or
otherwise that specifically says that it does per-packet load balancing,
however, one of the functions of MLPPP is that it can perform fragmentation
and reassembly of packets over a given size, so if it can do that, I would
assume that it can do per-packet load balancing...

Anyway.. weren't looking for that long winded response, were ya?  =)

Mike W.

Sean Knox  wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
 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


  -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=7i=43280t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]

2002-05-03 Thread Howard C. Berkowitz

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=7i=43283t=43265
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]