On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 12:17 -0600, Patrick D. Nix, Jr wrote: > Which would give the better experience?
It depends on what you need. If more it's just more throughput, then either will likely give you what you need. Both can give you failover capability. OSPF will act more like FDX, though it is not true FDX. My advice is to use what you're most comfortable with from the technical perspective. OSPF uses path cost to simulate the FDX behavior. Bonding uses a round robin approach and failure detection to aggregate traffic over the links. I've done both and both work well. -- ******************************************************************** * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation * * http://www.butchevans.com/ * Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * * NOTE THE NEW PHONE NUMBER: 702-537-0979 * ******************************************************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
