Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

Per-packet VS. Per-destination load balancing , . .

Can someone suggest a situation where per-packet load balancing would be a better method than per-destination (in CEF)?

7 REPLIES
New Member

Re: Per-packet VS. Per-destination load balancing , . .

if you want the load to actually be equal rather than unequal

Re: Per-packet VS. Per-destination load balancing , . .

Hi

You will use load balancing per packet : 1.When your multiple links are running on 80% average and you cannot make one link to carry 95% and other 65% if done per destination load balancing .

2.When the links are from single provider , you can go for load balancing per packet

Load balancing per destination :

1.If the links are not very much utilised and if per destination load balancing happens also , you will not have problem

2.If your wan links are from multiple providers , so that in case of latency diff from the provider will not have problems in reachability of packets.

Hope it helps

regards

vanesh k

New Member

Re: Per-packet VS. Per-destination load balancing , . .

Thanks, this does help.

-Shikamarunara

Re: Per-packet VS. Per-destination load balancing , . .

Hi Friend,

This can be used if you have 2 parallel links going from Site A to Site B and you want to load-balance the traffic equally on these 2 links. By default the load-balacning will be per-destination and this will not distribute the load equally. Now to achieve the equal distribution of packets on these 2 links use the CEF per-packet load-balancing.

HTH, Please rate if it does.

-amit singh

New Member

Re: Per-packet VS. Per-destination load balancing , . .

I know how it's used, no this does not answer my question.

My question is; in what kind of situation would it matter to load balance at the packet level as opposed to the destination level?

-Shikamaru

Hall of Fame Super Silver

Re: Per-packet VS. Per-destination load balancing , . .

Shikamaru

If you have a situation in which out of order packets will not have a negative impact on the applications running and where you want to possibly get more even spread of traffic over multiple paths, then you have a situation in which per packet load balancing might be a better method.

HTH

Rick

Re: Per-packet VS. Per-destination load balancing , . .

I agree with rick on this. VOIP is one of the example where you cannot run per-packet load-balacning on the parallel links. If you are running VOIP and you enable the per-packet load-balancing, you might turn into a whole lost of problems like voice packet out of order arrival which will make the voice traffic as choppy and un-audible.

HTH,

-amit singh

1219
Views
0
Helpful
7
Replies