| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
The discussion is whether we need load balancing capabilities
in RPR.
The issue is of load balancing on both the east and west interfaces.
1. RPR selects the working direction for a given destination MAC address
and never changes it unless required for protection.
OR
2. RPR mayload balance over the working and the protection path.
Any comments from the hibernating RPRians?
-----Original Message-----
From: Albert Herrera [mailto:albherre@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 10:11 AM
To: Raj Sharma
Cc: 'Alex Levit'; 'ptrings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'; Yossi Bar Sheshet; Jason Fan; Derek Mayweather
Subject: Re: Load sharing on the ring
Given equal cost paths to a destination node, I think layer 2
will choose one direction only and will not load balance.
This is an issue for RPR but I don't think dual paths towards
a single detination node within the same ring, is worth
the added complexity. In terms of layer 3, it sees a single
interface only to the ring although TE should have some
knowledge of ring direction to impose an alternate path.
Albert
Raj Sharma wrote:
Alex,
The first point is that If the routers see the connection to RPR as one port than
load balancing over the ring becomes a layer 2 issue.
Obviously, there is a seperate layer 3 load balancing issue.
As an example, if 2 routers on the ring can be the next hop for a specific prefix
as seen from a third router on the same ring. This 3rd router may wish to
spread traffic between those 2 routers. In this case the load balancing will
result in different destination MAC addresses.
Putting the first point together with this we could conjecture that layer 2 will
decided whether these packetsgo clockwise or counter clockwise to the their
layer 2 destinations.
So, the response to your question is that load balancing is required at both layers.
raj
-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Levit [mailto:Alexl@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 3:50 AM
To: 'ptrings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Cc: Yossi Bar Sheshet
Subject: Load sharing on the ring
Hello all,
Could anybody say something regarding load-sharing on the ring? Should it
present at layer2 or layer3?
I think, it seems to be at layer2 for best-effort traffic and at layer3 for
QoS.
Let me know if I am wrong.
thank you
Alex Levit