Hi, if you are running CEF (generally a good idea), then per-packet load balancing can be turned on with the command 'ip load-sharing per-packet'. You have to configure this on the outgoing interfaces (if I remember correctly).
Note however that per-destination load balancing means only that packets for a given source-destination host pair take the same path, so if you have more than one host on any side of the network and traffic is more or less evenly distributed among them, then it should work even with per-destination load balancing (which is the default setting if you use CEF). The command 'no ip route-cache' turns off fast switching, which would also result in per-packet load balancing but also in a performance hit. I think this is what you have heard about. I don't think per-packet load balancing with CEF will decrease performance. Thanks, Zsombor At 11:58 PM 6/28/2003 +0000, Stephen Manuel wrote: >Group, > > > >I have a customer that has two locations connected via 2-Full >point-to-point T1's. > > > >The customer has a 1720 at each location. > > > >The customer is using EIGRP to load balance the two locations. > > > >The networks at each location show in the routing tables with the same >administrative distance. > > > >Everything is fine up to this point. > > > >However, when I look at the traffic statistics for each of the T1's, the >first T1 has significantly higher utilization. > > > >My research has led me to believe the reason that traffic isn't spread >more evenly over the T1's is due to the way the 1720's switch the >traffic. > > > >It's my understanding that by default the 1720's use per-destination >load balancing in the type of scenario my customer has. > > > >Since only one network is at each location this would explain the >utilization issues. > > > >The solution appears to be for the customer to implement per packet load >balancing. > > > >Am I correct on my points so far ?? > > > >If I implement per packet load-balancing for the customer, is the >command to do this no ip route-cache ?? > > > >If yes, on what interface do I place the command, if not what are the >command or commands and how are they implemented ?? > > > >One of the warnings I've read about concerning per packet load-balancing >is that low end routers like the 1720 may not be able to handle, should >I be concerned about the 1720's ?? > >The customer has a pair of 2621's we could use in place of the 1720's. > > > >Bottomline, the customer would like to load balance the two locations >via the two T1's move evenly, am I proceeding the right direction ?? > > > >If not, what recommendations would others offer. > > > >Thanks in advance. > > > >Stephen Manuel Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71610&t=71607 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
