WAAS and 512 Deployment

Unanswered Question
Jan 28th, 2008

Attach is the Visio as well as config for the India site. The Visio has 2 tabs (POC-WAAS and Proposed-WAAS). The POC (Proof of Concept) tab does not have the spare 3660 installed yet but I plan to do that soon. The "Proposed WAAS" is where we would want to be. However, my question will most likely address POC tab with the preparation to move to the Proposed tab.

Current assumptions:

Since we have a Manager in India, we will be getting another Manager in Calif, If so, I would like to setup a Primary/Standby deployment for redundancy.


1. For Calif Primary WAE, the visio shows a Management interface but do I need a management interface or is it better to go with a standby interface instead as well as use MHSRP?

2. Since we have a high speed link (4 Mb Internet for VPN in POC but 10mb WAN for proposed), should we tune the buffers to the max? If so how?

3. Is this a recommend design for California? for India?

4. Is my configs a recommend configs for California 3660 in POC? If so, what do I need to change in 3825 in Proposed?

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
aamercado Mon, 01/28/2008 - 10:56

Oops - forgot to attach Visio


1. Using tertiary interface on Wccp Router

2. ip cef is on and redirect exclude on the WAE facing interface

3. 61/62 redirect in/out on the LAN interface

4. Only using unicast wccp 61/62.


Zach Seils Wed, 01/30/2008 - 06:39


A few comments:

1. You should consider replacing the 3660 prior to the pilot, or deploy the WAE inline (requires an inline module). The 3660 will become a throughput bottleneck otherwise.

2. Where do you plan on enabling WCCP is the proposed design? It is not clear from the Visio diagram.

3. What is the RTT latency of the WAN links? We'll need to know that before recommending any TCP buffer tuning.



aamercado Wed, 01/30/2008 - 15:21


After reading the SRND, I believe the best design is to move the 512 to the Cores. Please see the updated Visio and planned configs. Here's my updated requirements:

1. Calif is hub

2. All traffic to India (10.2/10.26) should go through the VPN tunnel through (ASA5520)

3. All traffic to 10.3 and 10.5 should go through WAN via (R-Voice2)

4. Latency to India is btwn 280 to 340msec and BW is 2mb. Do I also need to be concern with the BDP, L2 redirect(forwarding), and Mask assignments?


Zach Seils Fri, 02/01/2008 - 04:38


At a high level, this looks like it should work. Based on the BDP, there is no reason to adjust the TFO TCP buffers.


fernando.santos... Fri, 02/08/2008 - 07:57

Hello guys, sorry to use this discussion. I have just one question. I have made initial configuration on Edge, Core and CM following Cisco guides. Is that all wee need to do for having basic app acceleration ?

Zach Seils Mon, 02/11/2008 - 12:31


Have you configured WCCP or inline interception? Other than that, just make sure that the default Application Traffic Policy (ATP) is in place.


fernando.santos... Tue, 02/12/2008 - 06:55

I have done both and now I just found out we have a PIX between these two sites. They are into two different WANs connected through firewall. I need to work on firewall to check the interoperability.

Thank you,


aamercado Tue, 02/12/2008 - 15:30

If you are using cisco, make sure your on 7.2.3 so you can use "ip inspect waas" on your global policy


This Discussion