The MPLS-OPS Archive

["Palmer, Rob A" <Rob.Palmer@team.telstra.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. ELK [mailto:elkou141061@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 26 February 2004 10:05 PM
> To: Palmer, Rob A; mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
> Subject: RE: [MPLS-OPS]: unequal load sharing when forwarding traffic
> down MPLS TE tunnels using PBR
> 
> 
> Rob
> 
> I am not trying to answer specifically as have no sufficient 
> hand-on ,but 
> just to understand
> the pblm :
> 
> 1- Are U trying to achive un-equal load balancing by 
> configuring different 
> B.W reservation
>     of Tun0 and Tun1 . exampple Tun0 2M , Tun1 3 M so 
> approximately  2/3 of 
> traffic wil go to
>    Tun0 and approx.  3/5 will go to Tun1 .
>    my guess that CSCO box will do this .
> 

Yes I am trying to do this with MPLS TE tunnels and using PBR (rather than autoroute say) to forward selected traffic into the these tunnels so unequal load sharing occurs. The problem is not just about getting unequal load sharing to occur. It's getting it to work when PBR is used for forwarding the traffic onto the tunnels.
My simplistic understanding is that the load sharing is based on the presence of multiple entries for a route in the PATH table. My understanding is that PBR does not effect the path table and I can't see a way of setting a policy that will direct the traffic to more than one tunnel. hence the indirect approach that i have asked about. my thinking is that by forwarding traffic into the two tunnels by explictly setting up the static route(s), firstly creates the required multiple entries in the PATH table to enable load sharing to occur. and then the second step of using PBR to direct the selected traffic onto this static route, to achieve the desired end result. But there may be a better, more direct way of doing it that i am not aware of...

Rob

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml