nanog mailing list archives
Re: Split flows across Domains
From: Simon Leinen <simon () limmat switch ch>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:15:26 +0100
Robert E Seastrom writes:
Yes and no. CEF is {src, dst} hash IIRC, and "per-flow" usually means {src, srcport, dst, dstport, [proto, tos]} hash in my experience.
Correct. The Catalyst 6500/7600 OSR with Sup2/Sup32/Sup720 can be configured to hash based on L4 ports in addition to the IP addresses (for IPv4): http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2005-December/026952.html This is handy when you have multiple "striped" TCP connections between a single pair of hosts, and want them to be able to use multiple equal-cost paths, but still want to avoid reordering inside each connection (as you would inevitably get with per-packet load sharing). -- Simon.
Current thread:
- Split flows across Domains Glen Kent (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Robert E . Seastrom (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Christopher L. Morrow (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Robert E . Seastrom (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Joe Abley (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Joe Abley (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Robert E . Seastrom (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Joe Abley (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Robert E . Seastrom (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Simon Leinen (Jan 25)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Christopher L. Morrow (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Christopher L. Morrow (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Matt Buford (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Joe Abley (Jan 24)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Steven M. Bellovin (Jan 25)
- Re: Split flows across Domains Robert E . Seastrom (Jan 24)