What is the load balance method of 3750 port channel ( by source ip , or by source mac ) to diver traffic to paths? I have tried to use 10.242.104.101 and 10.242.104.102 as source ip, it will travel to the same link (G0/1) within one port channel (G0/1+G0/2). Howerver, if I later use 10.242.104.109, then this time it will traffic to G0/2 link. What's the concept behind.
I have two offices in rural area with a quite distance between them. Offices are connected with private wireless 100Mbps and cooper 100Mbps links provided by different ISP. Wireless connections are delivered as a private L3 Ethernet link but cooper as private L2 Ethernet trunk link. In both offices I have Cisco 3750 L3 switches. I would like to use both link (equal-cost paths) in load balanced configuration but not sure how. Both switches running EIGRP. Asymmetric routing is not an option. Per-destination load-balancing or something else?
I 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.
What 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.
I have a customer that would like a 40Gb port-channel between two 3750-x switch stacks. When I try to activate four 10Gb ports in the channel, they go into error-disable. However, I am able to create a 20Gb port-channel without issue. I have had my configurations verified to Cisco best practice.
Is there a limitation on the amount of throughput that the 3750-x can handle? According to the data sheet the 3750X-48T can handle 101.2mpps, based on two 10Gb uplinks so if my math is correct then a stack of two 3750X-48T should be able to handle 202.4mpps.
I have 3750 core/distribution switches with routing enabled in two offices connected with copper link and L3 port channel interfaces. NewOffice#2 has moved about 5 miles farther away from office#1 and I have to deploy new core/distribution switch connect it to old core#2 via F.O and move all access switches with it. Old core will stay in old #2 offices as a bridge between office#1 and new office#2 Office#1core<->copper (Ethernet) <->oldoffice#2core<->f.o. <->new office#2core How I should configure port channels ports on oldoffice#2 core to act as bridge between office#1 core/dist and newoffice#2 core/dist without changing anything else (ip, etc) on whole network
I am building a new network and intended on using the min-link feature on my port-channels between a 3750-X series switch and Nexus 4k.
However reading further into this it seems this feature is only supported on higher end models. I cannot find any reference to the min-links feature in the 3750-X configuration guide. Is this an available feature?
The 3750-X model is WS-C3750X-24T-L running IOS 12.2(55)SE3 IP Services
My thoughts is that the is only an LACP supported feature so I may not see the command until I have entered an LACP specific command on the port-channel but unfortunately I do not have a 3750X to verify this on at present.
We have a switch that, when configuring auto qos on and edge port facing video equipment, the upstream port channel drops. I was wondering if no auto qos would have to be configured on the member ports of the port channel prior to enabling auto qos on any other ports.
how to configure this. I did it in the past but kind of forgot how I did it.I have a stacked 3750 (two physical switches) connecting to a 2960.
I am creating trunk ports with limited access to VLAN 300, 600, and 700.
There is two interfaces connected from the 3750's(one on each physical stack member) to the 2960.I have the physical interfaces configured exactly the same.
Should I keep the configuration on the physical ports and not configure the Port-Channel Interfaces? Do I need to configure port-channel load balancing? Is the channel-group mode sufficient? Goal is to basically create 2 links to the 2960 to double the bandwidth and provide redundancy.
What is the best way to load balance traffic between an FWSM and ASA 5520? Both are attached to a 6509-E (in seperate VLANs). The problem is the FWSM doesn't support any dynamic routing protocols (in multi context mode). So with my limited knowledge I don't see a way to do this.
Is it possible configuring load balance with three intefaces, in my router with the following features?I have three ISP, and would like balance the traffic ... Cisco IOS Software, C2900 Software (C2900-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 15.2(2)T1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Cisco CISCO2911/K9 (revision 1.0) with 483328K/40960K bytes of memory.
Processor board ID FTX1613AH8D 3 Gigabit Ethernet interfaces 1 terminal line 2 Channelized (E1 or T1)/PRI ports 1 Virtual Private Network (VPN) Module DRAM configuration is 64 bits wide with parity enabled. 255K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory. 250880K bytes of ATA System CompactFlash 0 (Read/Write)
I am using 192.168.1.1 as database server in head office. my branch user are more than 500. all user hit at 192.168.1.1 for database. Now i want to NAT with application server 192.168.1.50 and 192.168.1.51 with load balance As some user hit 192.168.1.1 form branch but traffic go to 192.168.1.50 and some users traffic go to 192.168.1.51.
I want to do it in My core router (Cisco 3845) in Head office. How i do these two things ?
I have problem with VPN and Load Balance at the same time.VPN (Gateway to Gateway) between two RV042 routers is working fine with only one WAN or two WAN's with Smart Link Backup. If i switch to Load Balance communication through VPN is almost impossible.
I have postgres server (port 5432) in first location and clients in another. Clients cannot connect to server or lose connection after while. This is example, but every communicaton except ICMP over VPN with Load Balance enabled is faulty (file sharing, RDP...). Everything works fine using public IP and port forwarding or VPN with only one WAN.
If i understand it correctly Protocol Binding should affect only "normal" communication (outside of VPN), but it looks like VPN communication is also divided between WAN1 and WAN2. Of course this cannot work this way because VPN works only with one WAN.
Another question - is it possible to bind communication TO selected target port with RV042 Load Balancing to selected WAN?
I would like know, what license is necessary to employ a load-balance in a 2911 router. I have these licenses bellow, can i configure an load balance?In this cenario we have two links with an ISP.
Cisco IOS Software, C2900 Software (C2900-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 15.2(2)T1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Cisco CISCO2911/K9 (revision 1.0) with 479232K/45056K bytes of memory. Processor board ID FTX1613AH8D 1 FastEthernet interface 3 Gigabit Ethernet interfaces 1 terminal line 2 Channelized (E1 or T1)/PRI ports(code)
We have a Dlink Lb 604 router. We have two wan connections. Connection 1 has a speed up to 8 Mbps.Connection 2 has a speed of 1Mbps.We set the load balance to 50-50. When we tested the speed with two lines it is showing 1 Mbps only.When working with connection 1 we are getting speed upto 6 Mbps.
I have a D-Link DSL 2640B on the way which I plan on using to replace my 2Wire modem. The 2640B is a combination of a modem/wireless device. Does it dynamically load balances the internet connection? Sometimes while I'm playing online games on my PC and a few others are using the internet for browsing or Youtube, I lag A LOT. Latency shoots up from 10 to 200. QoS goes to ****. And I only need 0.50-1Mbps to keep a steady online play. This was the problem with my 2Wire. So does the 2640B load balance the bandwidth?our max speed is 3.5Mbps according to the ATT Rep.
i need to know how many links i can using with load-balance on the same router ? i have router cisco 2901 , 3 providers , every provider having 4 links can i load balance between 12 links ? i am using static route
I want to split my traffic between two ISP's. I want all traffic to pass over one connection EXCEPT my VPN tunnels, which I want to use the second ISP. How should I set up (protocol binding?) to accomplish this? (I have run into various problems trying to load balance all traffic. So I am trying to "partition" traffic.)
I have set up an RV042 v1 and v3 both in Load Balancing mode. Set in Router mode.I want one of the WAN ports to be preferred so I added a static route to 0.0.0.0 metric 5 to that WAN.Sometimes the route shows in the routing table and sometimes it goes away!!
I've finished a part of the configs on above equipments, please refer to the attached diagram.And I'm making a test in order to achieve the below features:
1. By default, packets from PC1 go out through ISP 1. Packets from PC2 go out through ISP 2 2. When ISP 1 is down, packets from PC1 changed its way to ISP 2 through the 2800 router. And when ISP 2 is down, Packets from PC2 changed its way to ISP 1 through ASA 5510.
I have several RV16 with two internet connections each one, but different speed each wan connection, it takes the slowest wan connection allways, I use the round robin option, any clue in configuring?
We want to us an ISA570 and load balance between two isp connections, two of our switches will be standalones and not connected to one another. One switch will be for data and another VOIP/Data. The ISA will also do NAT and we need to make sure that the VOIP network can get out to the first isp. I assume we will need a static route for that to make sure it goes out the right isp. I just don't know if routing mode needs to be enabled in order to specify a static route, because I heard you can't have NAT and do routing mode at the same time.
I configured a RV042 to load balance 2 WANs. It appears to working well but I would like a 2nd opinion as to whether or not I chose the proper settings to accomplish the task.
1. WAN1(ISP1) is the existing internet connection(1.5mb T1). I have a block of static IPs with ISP1. 2. I added ISP2 to the RV042's WAN2 connection to increase bandwith (10mb). I only have one static IP on ISP2. 3. I want everyone on this router to use WAN2... well... almost everyone... for the most part. 4. I want to keep WAN1 active on this router because there will be periodic inbound connections using static IPs (from ISP1) that are setup with one-to-one NAT. I also have a voicemail system that needs to continue to use ISP1's email relay (SMTP,25).
Anyway, I was able get the outgoing traffic that had to remain on WAN1 working with protocol binding. In order to get the router to use WAN2 for pretty much everything else, I set it for load balancing and set "Max. Bandwidth provided by ISP" for WAN1 up & down kbits/sec both to 32 (very low). I left the WAN2 up & down settings to the actual speed of WAN2.
The result is very low traffic on WAN1 and lots of traffic on WAN2 which is what I wanted. Did I do this right? Is there another preferred method to accomplish this.
I have 3 877 ADSL routers for internet connectivity. I recently installed a FW behind them and would like to use the Ciscos as load balance in order to get better utilization from my 3 internet links.
1) the 3 routers are on DHCP from the ISP on the WAN side.
2) the 3 ciscos are on the same class C subnet on the LAN side: 10.201.1.252, 10.201.1.253 and 10.201.1.254
ISP environment with 3 Cisco 7200 BRAS ( NPE-G2 ) , we need to load balance traffic between two of them so the load balancer will accept traffic from backhauling link and distribute traffic the upper two BRAS , can we achieve this using spare 7200 we have or is there any software solution can do this .
another question , Cisco 7200 VXR ( NPE-G2 ) , does it support concurrent calls or sessions from more than 16000 subscriber ?