Route Maps & ADSL Load Sharing & Failover

[dimitris.stathopoulos]

Hello,

As demonstrated on the network diagram:

• I have a 1841 connected on 2 ADSL lines on different ISPs with route maps & cef
• I have an 3650e switch connected on the router on a single interface
• 1841 is connected to 3560e using 192.168.168.0/30
• 3560e hosts 10.224.244.0/24 segmented into different subnets (VLSM)
• 3560e publishes 10.224.244.0 on 1841 using EIGRP

Attached you may find the router's configuration.

I would kindly request:

1. Ways to troubleshoot why ADSL lines are slow
2. Any suggestions for fixing 1841's configuration

Thank you in advance for any support provided.

[tkatsiaounis]

I got a config like yours except i have set interface on the route maps and i do not use the algorithm on cef. It's pretty quck.  My config on your router would be

no ip cef load-sharing algorithm include-ports source destination

route-map ADSL0 permit 10
 match ip address 11 or 12 14
 set interface Dialer0
!
route-map ADSL1 permit 10
 match ip address 11 or 12 14
 set interface Dialer1

Hope it helps.

[dimitris.stathopoulos]

Thanks a lot for your support.

I will try the suggested solution today and then post the results

[dimitris.stathopoulos]

Thank you for the suggestion. 

Tried the solution suggested but it did not work.

[SANTHOSHKUMAR SARAVANAN]

Hi ,

  Check for CEF load balancing status , if everything look good from CEF perspective . Check your application access by bring down one ASDL link , ensure traffic is being sent on only one ASDL link .Then check for application access on speed . Do it vice versa with another link .

 http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ios-nx-os-software/ios-software-releases-120-mainline/47205-cef-whichpath.html

Check on the match statement , with your configuration among three ACL only one will be matched at a time . 

HTH

sandy

• If a match command refers to several objects in one command, either of them should match (the logical OR algorithm is applied). For example, in the match ip address 101 121 command, a route is permitted if it is permitted by access list 101 or access list 121.

•  

[dimitris.stathopoulos]

Hello,

I have tried troubleshooting cef, and you may find the results attached.

The problem is that in cef all configurations seem to be ok.

My only concern is the following entry:

#sh ip cef 0.0.0.0/8

0.0.0.0/8  drop

#sh ip cef 0.0.0.0

0.0.0.0/32 receive

[dimitris.stathopoulos]

performed some fixes i.e. removed auto-summary from eigrp in order to have a better view of the routing table, but the problem still persists.

Another thing that I managed to trace by debugging cef:

*May 14 20:35:08.939: CEF-Drop: Packet from 83.34.133.100 (Di0) to 92.118.197.195, Virtual Fragment Reassembly feature
*May 14 20:35:09.231: CEF-Drop: Packet from 83.34.133.100 (Di0) to 92.118.197.195, Virtual Fragment Reassembly feature