Lossy cogent p2p experiences?
Mike Hammett
nanog at ics-il.net
Fri Sep 1 13:44:36 UTC 2023
and I would say the OP wasn't even about elephant flows, just about a network that can't deliver anything acceptable.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Saku Ytti" <saku at ytti.fi>
To: "Mark Tinka" <mark at tinka.africa>
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Sent: Friday, September 1, 2023 8:29:12 AM
Subject: Re: Lossy cogent p2p experiences?
On Fri, 1 Sept 2023 at 14:54, Mark Tinka <mark at tinka.africa> wrote:
> When we switched our P devices to PTX1000 and PTX10001, we've had
> surprisingly good performance of all manner of traffic across native
> IP/MPLS and 802.1AX links, even without explicitly configuring FAT for
> EoMPLS traffic.
PTX and MX as LSR look inside pseudowire to see if it's IP (dangerous
guess to make for LSR), CSR/ASR9k does not. So PTX and MX LSR will
balance your pseudowire even without FAT. I've had no problem having
ASR9k LSR balancing FAT PWs.
However this is a bit of a sidebar, because the original problem is
about elephant flows, which FAT does not help with. But adaptive
balancing does.
--
++ytti
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20230901/748590d2/attachment.html>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list