Sure, no problem!
If you have two different equal-cost routes to the same destination,
the router has a few options when deciding which path to choose. These
options are called switching modes, and the two most basic are called
process switching and fast switching.
Process switching performs per-packet load balancing. This means if
you have a stream of packets going to the same destination, the router
will alternate between the possible outgoing interfaces on a per-packet
basis. This is fairly processor-intensive.
Fast switching performs per-destination load balancing. In this mode
the first packet of any given stream is process switched. The router
takes note of that particular destination and exit interface and puts
this information into the fast switching cache. Any subsequent packets
destined for that same destination are sent out of the same interface.
Using this method, the router roughly divides the number of destinations
between the two available exit interfaces. Fast switching is quite a
bit less processor-intensive that process switching.
In your situation, per-packet load balancing could cause some problems.
Fast switching would seem to be the way to go.
Does that help? I kept getting interrupted while typing this so I hope
it makes sense.
Regards,
John
>>> "Sam Sneed" 6/26/01 11:59:01 AM >>>
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "per destination load balancing".
I'm
am new to Cisco products so some of the terminology is over my head.
Could
you clarify this for me with the commands I would use? Thanks alot.
""John Neiberger"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Sure, you can do this. But why? Why not use per-destination load
> balancing instead of paying for an unused link? To achieve your
goal,
> do exactly as you stated. Setting the AD higher on one of the
static
> routes will do what you want.
>
> To answer the last question, if a directly connected interface goes
> down then all routes that exit that interface are immediately
removed
> from the routing table. In the case of floating static routes, the
> change to the backup default will be instantaneous.
>
> HTH,
> John
>
> >>> "Sam Sneed" 6/26/01 11:08:32 AM >>>
> Currently my internet connection is a Cisco 4700 with 2 frame relay
> lines.
> We do load sharing by having 2 default routes through each link.
> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial0.1
> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial1.1
> This works quite well but we only want to use one link and have the
> other
> for backup so our ISP will charge a lower rate. I also want to stay
> away
> from using routing protocols.(its a small network).
>
> Will this work:
> Assign a greater adminstrative distance to one of the default routes
so
> it
> will never be used over the desired default route unless the desired
> link
> goes down.
>
> Also how long does it take for a directly connected route and static
> routes
> assoicated with an interface to disappear from the routing tables?
>
> Thanks
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=9994&t=9979
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
