amb at gxn.net
Wed Dec 17 11:46:57 UTC 1997
Curtis et al.
> Minor correction but big difference in meaning. Per prefix is fine.
> It is per packet load split that causes trouble.,
Excuse my ignorance here, but I presume you are refering to per packet
load sharing where the the router A sends packets alternately to
router B and router C, as opposed to "per packet" load sharing
across two links between routers A & B. The former is obviously brain
damaged, but I can't see the problem with the latter assuming the
lines have similar delay characteristics so you don't get disordered
packets etc., and in fact with the standard Cisco switching cache algorithms
(and I presume most other vendors) this ends up nearly per prefix anyway.
Or am I missing something horrendous here?
GX Networks (formerly Xara Networks)
More information about the NANOG