How exactly do you set those metrics in OSPF? is there a way to control the ratio, other than by adjusting the interface cost?
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Dennis Burgess <dmburg...@linktechs.net> wrote: > You do not define capacities, just load balancing metrics, such as 4:1 or > 7:2 etc. > > L3 is always better right? L2 you can’t do 7:2 so, hence its better > right! J > > > > The radios should handle the bonding as well, as long as they are the same > speed, if not, then they radios will do LACP but guess what, 1:1 only. > > > > > > *Dennis Burgess** –** Network Solution Engineer – Consultant * > > MikroTik Certified Trainer/Consultant > <http://www.linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5> – > MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE > > > > For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net > > Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com > > Office: 314-735-0270 <(314)%20735-0270> > > E-Mail: dmburg...@linktechs.net > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Steve Jones > *Sent:* Monday, January 15, 2018 2:39 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] LACP or what for non symetric throughput > > > > where would you define the link capacities in OSPF setup? > > What makes L3 preferable to L2 for this? > > > > In my particular case, im going to leave the rb1100ahx2 in place and bring > the fiber down to HP switches. Mainly because I have the switches and dont > want to immediately replace the routers with $1k+ routers until we have > settled on the bonding just to get SFP. If L3 is preferred I can just vlan > the ports I guess. > > > > Another question, is 2+0 normally something that the radios handle the > bonding in? This setup is an outlier. It wasnt even listed on SAF as an > option for this model until this. > > > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Dennis Burgess <dmburg...@linktechs.net> > wrote: > > MT using OSPF is the proper method, LACP does not take into account > loading, its jus a LAG group, and it will be 1:1. That’s it. OSPF you can > acutallly load balance 3:1 or 6:1 etc, but the more connections the better > the load balance. But that is the number of connections, not actual load > but again, if you have lots of connections then it will balance out. Plus > failover is simpler as well (at least in my eyes) > > > > > > *Dennis Burgess** –** Network Solution Engineer – Consultant * > > MikroTik Certified Trainer/Consultant > <http://www.linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5> – > MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE > > > > For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net > > Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com > > Office: 314-735-0270 <(314)%20735-0270> > > E-Mail: dmburg...@linktechs.net > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard > *Sent:* Monday, January 15, 2018 2:01 PM > *To:* af <af@afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] LACP or what for non symetric throughput > > > > It looks like Mikrotik supports several different types of bonding, some > of which appear to support asymmetrical links. I just started looking into > this stuff myself, so I really don't know what I'm talking about... I'm > currently just using OSPF to load balance a couple of links, and I'm trying > to figure out if there's a better way we should be doing it. > > > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > so what options do I have here/ we are currently bench testing lacp in HP > switches to get moving, but need a longer term better solution > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 6:38 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > im not being argumentative btw, im outside my scope, just showing my data > sources. I honestly dont know what to do here. > > > > > > If a contractor here wants to offer some services, i have that budget as > well. Im not certain our usual contractor will give me what i need... and > butch doesnt answer my emails > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=110400 > > > > If Im reading the mikrotik guy (MRZ) response correctly. mikrotik will > balance a single stream across multiple ports > > > > I put my comprehension at a 10% reliability, so.... > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Josh Baird <joshba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > You will have the same limitation using LACP. > > > On Jan 12, 2018, at 5:00 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > that will limit single stream to single port speed, will it not? So I > would end up saturating one link while not using the other if a single > stream were to get heavy? > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:50 PM, Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Don't try to do it at L2. Build it as router-to-router OSPF+BGP adjacency > across the two separate Integra links. > > > > Build it as two OSPF /30 links and use OSPF cost to adjust traffic > accordingly. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:48 PM, Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > So we will be doing this integra 2+0 link. We got dinged by sprint though > on the PCN. so we have to drop one sides power on one channel since this > path has no other channels. This drops that one chain to 256qam (for > reliability) from 1024 so 643-514mbps. This model 2+0 the radios dont > communicate so its really just 2 separate links handled externally > > > > so I go from (643+643) / (643+643) to (514+643) / (643+643) > > > > Is there any way with LACP to account for this single path that will be > lower than the other two? > > > > There is nothing that fully ties me to LACP. I have the option of HP > procurve switches or Mikrotik CCR routers to handle the aggregation. > > > > As best I can tell LACP doesnt have any granular throughput definition, > just splits traffic across all interfaces (last i read, routeros and the hp > OS both allow full aggregate speed instead of single streams being limited > to individual port throughput) > > > > In my case with 1.2gbps i still have an 800mbpsish overflow issue. so If > there is an aggregation thats semi dynamic and granular to actual link > capacity, that would tickle my goat > > > > any advice from the sages? > > > > Id like to keep my switch/routers solution to under 1k per side, much less > if possible. I already have HP 1810g-24 that i believe will handle this, so > theyre effectively free > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
