Robert Blayzor [EMAIL PROTECTED] uttered the following thing:
of the links to be used.
Use method 2 especially if you mean this to be a L3 handoff to the
customer.
What Mike states is correct about the layer2 vs layer3 load balancing:
Ben Buxton wrote:
On a related note - is it possible to get a 650x switch to perform flow
based etherchannel load balancing, WITHOUT the switch actually routing
(ie performing purely swithcing functions)??
I believe you then have to play around with the frame distribution
settings in the Cat to
Hey Everyone,
I am building out a customer that needs more than 1000Mbps of sustained
bandwidth. Because of the customer equipment, etherchannel was suggested
as the means to do this (it is compatible with this customers equipment).
I am running a 6509 with Dual SUP720's in IOS mode only (no
Do you need VLAN support or just a routed interface ?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Richard J. Sears
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 10:23 PM
To: Nanog
Subject: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel
Hey Everyone,
I am building out
, July 27, 2004 10:23 PM
To: Nanog
Subject: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel
Hey Everyone,
I am building out a customer that needs more than 1000Mbps of sustained
bandwidth. Because of the customer equipment, etherchannel was suggested
as the means to do this (it is compatible
On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 07:23:29PM -0700, Richard J. Sears wrote:
Hey Everyone,
I am building out a customer that needs more than 1000Mbps of sustained
bandwidth. Because of the customer equipment, etherchannel was suggested
as the means to do this (it is compatible with this customers
Richard J. Sears wrote:
I am building out a customer that needs more than 1000Mbps of sustained
bandwidth. Because of the customer equipment, etherchannel was suggested
as the means to do this (it is compatible with this customers equipment).
I am running a 6509 with Dual SUP720's in IOS mode
Richard J. Sears wrote:
I am running a 6509 with Dual SUP720's in IOS mode only
(no cat software). It was pointed out that there are really
two different ways to configure the switch - I guess my
question is which is the best (lowest overhead, etc)?
The two you posted are equivalent; the
Mike Sawicki wrote:
I would use method #2 above.. L3 FEC produces better balancing
results as it is flow based, rather than mac-based. I'm not 100%
certain that using the SVI interface would not produce a proper
balance, but I doubt it. Using method one I would expect only one
of the links to
