Right now I have 2 default routes load balancing 100MB internet links. This is on my 2 6509's.
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.47.2.1 (FWSM)
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.47.2.250 (5510)
Is there anyway to make the first default route take more of the traffic, like 60/40 or 70/30?Any program that I could use to see top users going through the FWSM?
I am trying to understand what load balancing method is used on a port channel on a Nexus switch . I have a server connected by a VPC to two Nexus switches. The nexus switches are only acting as layer 2 switches. I have a 6509 connected via a upstream link that does all of the routing for my VLANS. If have a server connected to the Nexus switches and it talks to a server on my 6509 what load balancing happens on the Nexus going across VPC 27 which is a layer 2 trunk going up to my 6509. Is it done on layer 2 or layer 3 flows?
My Nexus shows the default load balancing configurations
Port Channel Load-Balancing Configuration:System: source-dest-ip
Port Channel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:Non-IP: source-dest-macIP: source-dest-ip source-dest-mac
Is it possible to use two different load balancing methods at each end of a port-channel between two switches?
We have a Cisco 6509 at one end of the port-channel and a Cisco blade switch 3020 at the other end. Right now, we are using "src-dst-ip" at both end of the port-channel. We would like to change this. That is, we would like the #3020 switch to use "src-dst-ip" while the 6509 switch should use the "src-dst-port".
Why we want to do this, the reason is that we have FWSMs on the 6509. I've read that by configuring "src-dst-port" on the 6509, one can get a better performance of traffic going through the FWSM. However, the issue is that the 3020 switch does not support "src-dst-port".
Will there be some pause in traffic on formed ether channel interfaces (4500E switch), when i will change the default ether channel load balancing method to src-dst-port (or any other non-default method)?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have a question about filtering incoming bgp route updates from an internet provider. This provider sends the full internet routing table and default route and on an incoming prefix-filter on the customer switch (C6509-sup720) the default route is only accepted.What happens on the 6509 switch when the BGP peer flaps?Does it need to process all the internet routing updates, and if yes probably it cannot handle all these updates?What happens with the CEF table, will the switch install the routes first?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI got an issue when configure my 12416 router.
I plan to configure Static route load-balancing, which just assign different administraive distance to static routes.The route with lower distance is preferred. For example, if ISP A is our primary Internet provider the default route may be configured with a distance of 1 (all static routes are assigned this administrative distance) and the default route through ISP B may be configured with a distance of 100. In that case the default route through ISP B will be used if only the route through ISP A becomes unavailable.
But when I trying to configureWith Enhanced Object Tracking to do the route failover (a generic track object can monitor presence of an ip route, state of an SLA), I found my IOS not support such Track command. [code]
We have two 100 MBPS P2P link from two different ISP and we have terminated both the link on our 6509 switch. Now we want to configure the load balancing between these two disfferent ISP 100 MBPS P2P link.
So, how to go and what all options we can try ? We are thinking for Ether Channel configuration. Need your expert opinions on the same and if etherchannel configuration is the option then what would be the configuration for the same ?
We have Nexus 7K on production. 7K chasis is not load balancing with non-cisco devices with etherchannel or LACP..I have tried all load balancing algorithms but in vain. [code]
View 3 Replies View Relatedi'm going to configure a 881-k9 with:
- Ethernet 0/0 LAN (Private Address)
- Ethernet 0/1 ISP1 (Public Address 1)
- Ethernet 0/2 ISP2 (Public Address 2)
find some configuration example to:
- have load balancing over the two ISP connection, used to connect to Internet
- configure Static NAT to bind:
- TCP 443
- TCP 1723on ISP1 e ISP2 Interface to a LAN Address (SBS2008 Server)
I'm trying to make MGSCP solution. I have Cisco 7609 with following configuration:
Mod Ports Card Type Model
--- ----- -------------------------------------- ------------------
3 8 CEF720 8 port 10GE with DFC WS-X6708-10GE
5 5 Route Switch Processor 720 10GE (Activ RSP720-3CXL-10GE
7 24 CEF720 24 port 1000mb SFP WS-X6724-SFP
8 24 CEF720 24 port 1000mb SFP WS-X6724-SFP
9 48 CEF720 48 port 10/100/1000mb Ethernet WS-X6748-GE-TX.
I have conneccted a server with LACP on Nexus extender. I am starting different file copy from diffferent sources to this server, it does not load balance.
source addresse: 192.168.30.3 / 192.168.30.1
destination: 192.168.30.2
We have to cisco WS-C4900M with Cisco IOS Software, Catalyst 4500 L3 Switch Software (cat4500e-IPBASE-M), Version 12.2(53)SG5, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1).We have four gigabit link connected between those two switches.We have create a LACP port channel with those four ports on both switches. Ether-channel is up and running and defined with a load-balancing method of src-dst-ip.But when we test the load-balancing, it's not using the src-dst-ip rule with the XOR: [code]
View 5 Replies View RelatedI have a 2821 Router, with a VWIC2-2MFT card in it, with two T1s going into that card. The two T1s are a bundled MPLS line.
I then have a cable modem connection going into the gigabit Ethernet GE 0/1 port on the router.
Right now, the cable modem provides a backup connection in case the T1s go down.
What I was wondering is if there was a way to 'combine' the bandwidth from the two T1s with the cable modem?
How to set up redundant LAN Ring topology with load balancing for a cisco catalyst 3560 platform.
View 10 Replies View RelatedI would like configure a CSS content, that uses the sorry service principal in an advanced way.
I am familiar with the primary Sorry Server command and see that the CSS would send all connections to the named service that is configured as the primary Sorry Server.
What I would like to do is to configure the CSS, so that once it’s decided it’s in a “sorry” state (all the services that are configured with “add service” are down) that it load balances to a different set of services.
To explain what I’ve been trying to do in the form of configuration on the CSS, I’ve pasted some pretend config below.
Connections come into IP address 1.1.1.1, which normally get load balanced between 9.1.1.1, 9.1.1.2 and 9.1.1.3.
If 9.1.1.1, 9.1.1.2 and 9.1.1.3 are all down, the sorry service is used and the CSS starts passing traffic to 1.1.2.1, which I want it to load balance between 9.1.2.1, 9.1.2.2 and 9.1.2.3.
The order that I have applied the config, is different to the below, as I set out to configure in this order: secondary services, secondary content, sorry service, primary services, primary content.
The order of the config below is different, because I wanted it in the order that the traffic flows and the CSS won’t take the config in that order!
The wall I have ran into, is that when I try to create the service I have named “Sorry Service”, I get the following error:
%% Service IP Address conflicts with a local I/F, VIP, mg mt route.
[Code] .....
The best option for load balancing between 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches located at one site and connecting to 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches located at another site.
The sites are connected via a 1GB fibre connection. I am unable to use GLBP until GLBP is supported in further software releases.
Does 3650-X IP Base support Static Load Balancing or i should upgrade to ip service SW ?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI have probem with symmetric load balancig, in case when both ends of ether channel are on the sam switch (we are using VLAN translation).We need to create L2 port channel with both ends on same switch (Cisco WS-C4500X-24X-ES), for example:Po1 – Gi0/1, Gi0/3 (one end of port channel )Po2 – Gi0/2, Gi0/4 (other end of port channel)On ports in Po2 we will configure VLAN mapping.My question is what is the best ether-channel load-balancing scheme with wich we can accomplish full symmetry in both directions? For example, if traffic in one direction goes through Gi0/1 (member of Po1), in other direction also must go through Gi0/1. This is required because we need to connect four appliances for DPI (they are full L2 transparent) and traffic through each appliance need to be symmetric.
I can set-up src-ip, dst-ip, src-dst-ip etc. load balancing, but, actually I need src-ip on Po1 and dst-ip on Po2. Is there any way to set up different load balancing mechanism for different ether channel on same switch (4500X).
If the load balancing is set to src-dst-ip, will a layer 2 switch forward based on that information? Particularly talking about a 6500, with trunk interfaces, since those packets never go to the layer 3 engine, will the load-balancing work as intended?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have an inquiry about a configuration I deploy in a C2960 switch. I have configured a ether channel with 8 ports, the load balanced method is source mac address. The bundling protocol is LACP.
I have found the ether channel is not balanced as I expect. One of the eight interfaces is congested.
Code...
I have the requirement to provide a Cisco Router with 3 x ADSL lines (768k) to increase the internet speed.PPP multilink is not supported from the ISP.
Is it possbile to distribute the traffic between this three ADSL lines?How can I configure this?
I have the following hardware configuration:
1 x CISCO1921-SEC/K9
2 x EHWIC-VA-DSL-B
The third ADSL line is connected over an ADSL modem at one fixed Router Gigabit interface.
One of our customer has 3 ISP Line, out of which Two are Broadband and One is Leased Line. All 3 ISP interfaces are Etherent.
Now, they want Auto Failover with Load balancing among these 3 ISP lines.
Can we do same implementation in Cisco 1941 Router?? What licenses required in router for same?
I have a customer who wants his new ASA-5520 to load balance out-going traffic between 2 ISPs, fairly normal request. Now here's the twist. He wants to separate traffic based upon the protocol used, http to one ISP, https to the other.
View 3 Replies View RelatedWhat I am attempting to achieve is to aggregate trunk ports out of a VMware server into a single logical connection to give as much bandwidth as possible, the switches are 3750X and are three stacked together with the server connections spread across the stack. What I am not sure about is if two port channel load balance protocols can happy co-exist on the switch, by default the switch is using MAC address load balancing and Vmware wants to use IP Source load balancing. As other trunks and channels exist on the switch I don't want to make a change that will affect the other live connections if changing this is a global setting and not local on the channel.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have a dual-homed fabric (Nexus 2248 dual attached to two Nexus 5020's via vPC). On this Nexus 2248 is a server that has a four port LACP etherchannel. The ports do not appear to be load balancing correctly. The output below shows the four ports in use and it clearly shows port e138/1/10 as getting the most use. When I use the "show port-channel load-balance forwarding-path..." command on either of the vPC switches for various source and destination IP's that use this link, it shows them correctly load-balancing across the four ports. But we do not see this when looking at stats on both the server side and the switch side.
dc5020-3g# sh int e138/1/10,e138/1/12,e138/1/14,e138/1/16 | i seconds
30 seconds input rate 552 bits/sec, 69 bytes/sec, 0 packets/sec
30 seconds output rate 130120 bits/sec, 16265 bytes/sec, 161 packets/sec
Load-Interval #2: 5 minute (300 seconds)
30 seconds input rate 40 bits/sec, 5 bytes/sec, 0 packets/sec
[code]....
**************** Config info below. This is a vPC pair and the port configs are identical on both switches so I'm only showing the configs for one switch to keep it simple.
dc5020-3g# sh port-channel load-balance
Port Channel Load-Balancing Configuration:
System: source-dest-ip
Port Channel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
Non-IP: source-dest-mac
IP: source-dest-ip source-dest-mac
[code]....
I am testing on lab equipment (2 Catalyst 3550 and 1 Catalyst 3560) HSRP version 1 and 2.I successfully created a load balancing between the two Catalyst 3550 on a couple of vlans (11 and 12) on ver 1
now, just adding the command "standby xx version 2" my hosts on the 2 vlans are completely unable to ping the virtual IP def. gw on debugging i checked that msgs are exchangedthe two cat 3550 are seeing each other on HSRP (active / standby roles)the real ip addresses are pingable rebooted the swiches (just as a last resort try)deleted arp chache on hostsremoved the auth on hsrp all of this no effect.
i also tried to modify the priority on the cat 3560 (before he was on both vlans in standby) to make it the active one and with the same config it worked flawlessly.
My only idea is that there is a bug on CATs 3550 (IOS: c3550-ipservicesk9-mz.122-55.SE4.bin) [code]
My network has two connections to a third party via links on two seperate ASA , one in location A and one in location B. The link in location A is the primary connection and the other in location B should be used by only two terminals (term1, term2) in location B. ASA are running OSPF and are redistributing static routes as metric-type 1 in OSPF. In order to achive the aforementioned goal, I have configured a route-map on ASA location B, that sets the metric for the route towards the third party to a high value (100). This way, all routers, even those in site B prefer the exit through location A (metric about 24).
I have checked that my routers correctly have the route to the 3rd party through location A, and the OSPF database has records for the network from both locations.In location B, I have configured the following route-map (on 6509)
route-map PREFER-LOCAL-ROUTER permit 10
match ip address XXX
set ip next hop locationB-ASA
int vlanYYYY
ip policy route-map PREFER-LOCAL-ROUTER
[code]....
From the terminals (term1 and term2) I have tried a traceroute towards the 3rd party's subnet, but I don't get any match neither on the access-list nor on the route-map. Unfortunately I have no other way to test that my configuration is correct, since the application on the terminals, that should access the 3rd party network, is not currently running.
I also addedd the statements below to the access-list, because of the test with tracert:
permit icmp host term1 route_to_3rd_party 0.0.255.255
permit icmp host term2 route_to_3rd_party 0.0.255.255
Nothing changed...Is there something wrong with the above config? Is there a chance that there is a problem with the IOS, that simply doesn't show any hits?
I have a MPLS cloud in our data center. I want one network coming into our core router to have a different default route than the other networks coming in. I'm getting hits on the acl but the route isn't applied and goes to the default route that is configured in the router. I have other PBR for setting local-preferences and as-paths and they are working fine.
The router is a 7206 Version 12.4(11)T3
!
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.2.3.4
!
ip access-list extended 2nd_Default_Route
[Code].....
I have a Cisco 2960 ( WS-C2960-8TC-S) running 12.2(46)SE C2960-LANLITEK9-M image.I would like to set an ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 87.101.156.97 but the current image does not allow.Will ip default-gateway 87.101.156.97 work or do I need ip routing ?The ISP has provided a /30 address and we are using an additional /29 for our network devices. I dont think this image can be upgraded. I need to forward routes directly out to ISP. [code]
View 5 Replies View RelatedIP SLA configuration fails over but cannot ping the 4.2.2.2 via Site B. Here is the output on Cisco 3750...
SW2#show runBuilding configuration...
Current configuration : 2901 bytes!version 12.2no service padservice timestamps debug datetime msecservice timestamps log datetime msecno service password-encryption!hostname SW2!boot-start-markerboot-end-marker!!!!no aaa
[Code].....
I'm working on a little OSPF setup in my lab and having a problem pinging out to the internet.I have a setup with (3) 3550's running ip routing. I'm configuring OSPF but I can't ping the internet from any L3 switch except the switch with the actual uplink to the internet.[code] From SW2 and SW3, I can ping SW1 on all IPs (192.168.1.90, 10.10.10.1, 10.10.10.5) but I can't ping 192.168.1.1 which is my gateway to the internet.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have a 3750 at a branch running EIGRP connected to two routers that both have configured:
access-list 1 deny 0.0.0.0
access-list 1 permit any
access-list 2 permit 0.0.0.0
access-list 2 deny any
router eigrp 1distribute-list 1 out FastEthernet0/0distribute-list 2 in FastEthernet0/0
Due to this recently applied config the switch become unreachable from the outside and cannot ping anything. Everything connected to it works fine. I was able to remote into it from a switch behind it and noticed that the 3750 has no default route in the routing table. I do see a default route in the eigrp topology table. How to make the switch learn a default route maintaining the existing configuration on the routers.
We have two catalyst 3560 switches running c3560-ipbasek9-mz.122-58.SE2.bin They are connected using etherchannel using gi 0/21 - 24 interfaces.
on 3560-1 switch, there isn't any ip-default gateway or ip route configured. It only have 1 interface vlan configured.
on 3560-2 switch, there is ip default gateway configured along with 1 interface vlan.
What i dont understand here is that, i can reach out to other subnets from 3560-1 switch in which the routing is not enabled?
