[rbridge] Summary 1 of load-balancing rbridges

[Joe Touch]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



John Kristoff wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:29:09 +0100
> Mike Hughes <mike at linx.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>>From my operational perspective, MAC-based load-balancing just
>>
>>>*isn't* good
>>
>>enough, especially if you're dealing with a reasonable volume of
>>pre-aggregated traffic. (I've already sent my gory details, and I know
>>I'm not alone - though willing to accept being in a minority.)
> 
> 
> Fair enough.  It just seems to me the added complexity of peeking into
> upper layers may be problematic, but we live in an increasingly complex
> network environment these days.  I think I could envision similar
> problems that Joe described in the diagram with MAC-based flow load
> sharing when having to peek at the upper layers.  For instance, call
> his dst a VPN box.
> 
> John

Yeah - at some level, the aggregation is obfuscated by other layers. The
goal is to avoid reordering transport, but if there's no transport
visible there's (by definition) nothing you can do.

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFC/SXJE5f5cImnZrsRApE4AKDTbvT2E2NH9Q6btLtaxeL4DKsGPACaAxG4
v9KXO6qEbDh9WAxzIJLgOgM=
=gZi2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----