In a situation where there are two unequal cost paths to a remote site, and eigrp is running and correctly configured, is it necessary or even desireable to have CEF running as well? From the domumentation I've read eigrp should take the traffic share count on the interfaces and distribute packets to the interfaces according to that ratio. CEF on the other hand tries to maintain the same path for a given destination. These two scenarios would seem to be at odds with each other. I'm guessing there's something (lots probably) I don't understand.
It is desirable to run CEF at the same time... What you are thinking of when you say: "CEF tries to maintain the same path for a given destination" is the source/destination pairing used in CEF load sharing. All this does is prevent out of order packets by trying to keep each flow on the same link, but placing different flows on different links.
So, they aren't at odds with each other, and can, and should, be used together.
This is actually a pretty cool feature, i didn't even know it existed until I was looking for a solution to advertise a subnet (prefix in BGP talk), only if a certain condition existed. This is exactly what conditional advertisements does
j ai une question j ai achete un routeur cisco 887VA-k9 , je le configuré avec la configuration ci- dessous
si je le lier avec mon pc portable sur l un de ses ports directement ça marche toute est bien ( la connexion internet + m...
Attached policy provides CLI access to the Cisco 4G router over text messaging. Two files are in the attached .tar file:
2. PDF with instructions on how to load and use the .tcl file.