GroupStudy.com GroupStudy.com - A virtual community of network engineers
 Home  BookStore  StudyNotes  Links  Archives  StudyRooms  HelpWanted  Discounts  Login
RE: Ancient Isdn bri wisdom ? [7:40586] posted 04/08/2002
[Chronological Index] [Thread Index] [Top] [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]


To everyone, thank you for your advice, what you wrote seems reasonable.

However it seems this would mean if there are only single channel
connections (64k or 56k only) [m]route-cache and fair-queue can remain
enabled. I'll try that asap.

Heiko Herold

-- 
-- PREVINET S.p.A.            Heiko.Herold@xxxxxxxxxxx
-- Via Ferretto, 1            ph  x39-041-5907073
-- I-31021 Mogliano V.to (TV) fax x39-041-5907472
-- ITALY

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lomker, Michael [mailto:mlomker@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:31 PM
> To: cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Ancient Isdn bri wisdom ? [7:40586]
> 
> 
> > Now I tried to research the reason for that and really didn't 
> > find any.
> 
> It is done because ISDN lines are considered two physical 
> paths that are
> bonded together using PPP multilink or Cisco's proprietary 
> bonding.  If you
> don't disable route caching then the tcp/ip conversation will 
> always be
> switched out the same physical path (your big download will 
> only use 1/2 of
> the 128k connection).  It's easy to test that...just remove 
> it sometime.
> 
> no-fair queue appears to be the default for asynchronous 
> interfaces on the
> later versions of IOS.  To be honest, I'm not certain why 
> FIFO offers better
> performance than WFQ would on asynch lines; I can't find a 
> good explanation
> on CCO right now.




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=40798&t=40586
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to abuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx