I agree with the "pretty much always" except when you want to load balance over multiple paths. When multiple paths exist, fast switching moves data on a per-destination basis and not a per-packet basis as process switching does. Given different amounts of data will most likely be sent to different destinations, it would be possible to saturate one link while another goes relatively unused with fast switching.
Of course, who am I to challenge a Madman? ;-} Rik -----Original Message----- From: MADMAN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 5:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: route cache? [7:22262] Pretty much always, it's default, AKA fast switching. The command "no ip route-cache" enables process switching which is very CPU intensive. Dave george gittins wrote: > > when is it a good idea to enable route-cache -- 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=7&i=22304&t=22262 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
