Brett Johnson wrote: > > While I agree that upper-layer protocols do add overhead and we > have to take > into account the inter-frame gap, I still think I should be > able to achieve > greater then 75%. Additionally, doesn't the byte count from > the snmp string > include the upper-layer protocol bytes? I might be mistaken on > that, but I > thought I read that the byte count is accumulated with the > total packet size > including data and protocol headers. > > What I take from the conversation so far is that I should be > able to achieve > greater throughput if there are no problems with windowing, mtu, > retransmissions,.... Since these are test routers I am playing > with, I will > make sure there are no issues with them. These were the first > 3660s I > played with that have internal CSUs. My thought was using the > multiple lines > as one virtual pipe and load balancing through static routes > was causing the > problem. > > WS---\ _________________T1_____________ > WS----Switch---Router1_________________T1_____________Router2-----Server > WS---/ _________________T1_____________ > > If I am able to optimize both packet size and window size what > would be the > theoretical max throughput I could expect across a T-1 line > (not taking into > account end-device issues or switch latency)? This is more for > my own > knowledge.
A T1 is capable of moving 192k bytes per second. However, you still haven't answered the question of how you are sourcing test data. Without knowing that, there isn't much more we can tell you. It's pretty easy to visualize two T1s between a pair of routers. It's impossible to visualize your test scenario without some help. > > Thanks for all the responses. > > Brett Johnson > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=60040&t=60022 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
