ip load-sharing per packets

Unanswered Question
May 5th, 2009

Plataform: CISCO7609

Version 12.2(18)SXF14, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)

I want to configure Load balance per packet over ATM sub-interfaces.To according cisco documentacion, the command ip load-sharing per packets is supported in 12.2SX versions, please I need confirm that.

(CEF is active.)


RBCRV02#show ip cef vrf NAC detail, version 1037547, epoch 0, attached, per-destination sharing

0 packets, 0 bytes

tag information set, all rewrites owned

local tag: 91

via ATM7/0/0.1310, 0 dependencies

traffic share 1

valid adjacency

tag rewrite with AT7/0/0.1310, point2point, tags imposed: {}

via ATM7/0/0.1365, 0 dependencies

traffic share 1

valid adjacency

tag rewrite with AT7/0/0.1365, point2point, tags imposed: {}

0 packets, 0 bytes switched through the prefix

tmstats: external 0 packets, 0 bytes

internal 0 packets, 0 bytes

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Giuseppe Larosa Tue, 05/05/2009 - 11:55

Hello Mario,

I would suggest you to try to apply the command so you can see if it is accepted.

it should be

ip load-sharing per-packet on each subif

to check if per packet load balancing is effective you need to use some traffic test.

A basic test can be done with an extended ping in VRF NAC you can then look at pvc counters to find out if per packet load balacing is effective.

Hope to help


m.arancibia Tue, 05/05/2009 - 12:09

Hi Giuseppe,

I tested that, and I can't to apply this command, will be the version?

Thanks a lot.

Giuseppe Larosa Tue, 05/05/2009 - 12:16

Hello Mario,

it is not only an IOS version issue, it may depend on what type of linecard you are using.

Are you using a SIP linecard with SPA or flexwan with PA ?

Hope to help


m.arancibia Tue, 05/05/2009 - 12:23

We are using:

Enhanced FlexWAN controller

Hardware is cyBus ENHANCED ATM PA Plus


Giuseppe Larosa Tue, 05/05/2009 - 12:36

Hello Mario,

I'm afraid it is not supported.

As you can see in the following link not all features that are supported on a C7200 or C7500 are available.


I remember a similar thread with somebody else complaining of the same. In his case he had a PPP multilink of multiple E1 so he had already per packet load balancing.

There is a strict requirement for per packet load balancing in your project ?

Hope to help


m.arancibia Tue, 05/05/2009 - 13:01

Hi Giuseppe,

Thanks a lot for your help.

Our customer are reciving claims from the final user because the traffic output(traffic from provider to client) is not even in both ATM sub-interfaces.

The load sharing per destination have this properties...therefore I wanted to test change the configuration to load sharing per packets...

Paolo Bevilacqua Tue, 05/05/2009 - 13:32


You should never use per-packet load sharing, because it leads to out of order arrival and poor performances.

You could try MLPPP with PPPoA, but may encounter other performances issues.


This Discussion