MLPPP Follow Up - How we fixed the problem

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

I asked the group some time ago about some problems we were seeing with
MLPPP on our Cisco 7513s.

I have had 5 or 6 people contact me off list to ask how we solved the
problem, so I figured I would post "our" solution to the group. I am
sure there may be other fixes, however this works great for us and we
have not had a problem in months since converting all MLPPP customers
over.

Basically we shut down MLPPP and went with (ip load-sharing per-packet)

Here is what our config looks like:

interface Serial1/0/0/13:0
description Customer #4144 (San Diego) #1 UPDATE [4144]
ip address X.X.X.X 255.255.255.252
no ip directed-broadcast
ip load-sharing per-packet
ip route-cache distributed
no cdp enable

interface Serial2/1/0/14:0
description Customer #4144 (San Diego) #2 UPDATE [4144]
ip address X.X.X.X 255.255.255.252
no ip directed-broadcast
ip load-sharing per-packet
ip route-cache distributed
no cdp enable

ip route X.X.X.X 255.255.255.252 Serial1/0/0/13:0
ip route X.X.X.X 255.255.255.252 Serial2/1/0/14:0

The only problem that we ran into was that we had to use the Serial designator
of the interface in our route statement otherwise it will not work (or
at least it did not for us).

Since converting our customers (all MLPPP customers) to ip load-sharing
per-packet - we have had no further problems.

Hope this helps someone....

2

I asked the group some time ago about some problems we were seeing with
MLPPP on our Cisco 7513s.

  ...

ip route X.X.X.X 255.255.255.252 Serial1/0/0/13:0
ip route X.X.X.X 255.255.255.252 Serial2/1/0/14:0

The only problem that we ran into was that we had to use the Serial designator
of the interface in our route statement otherwise it will not work (or
at least it did not for us).

Since converting our customers (all MLPPP customers) to ip load-sharing
per-packet - we have had no further problems.

FWIW I have also observed that it is necessary to specify the
interface when doing per-packet load balancing across multiple PVCs,
e.g. as when doing load balancing across multiple DSL circuits. I
believe I mentioned this a while ago, but in a thread on a different
topic. That solution was the result of grasping at straws: it seems
that the router ought to be able to intuit the interface from the
target address, but apparently can not.

mm

3

I've done lots of this (with clear T1's, no frame or DSL), and never run
into that issue on 3640, 7206, 7500 series routers.