03-07-2014 01:52 AM - edited 03-04-2019 10:31 PM
Hi,
I have a requirement to "bond" two WAN links to be used as a single pipe by the remote site for improved performance at the site.
Current situation:
This need has risen because;
Please do not hesistate to get back for any clarification...Contributions much appreciated.
Mike.
03-07-2014 03:14 AM
Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
What you want to do is "bond" your two WAN links, per remote, where one runs to main site and one runs to remote site? Unless, you have something like Ethernet WAN links and have a VSS setup between your main and DR site, "bonding" links isn't likely.
However, assuming your links are routed (as you note using EIGRP), and assuming in a non-DR situation, traffic flows to/from your main site, you can configure link path costing so both the main site "looks" equal to/from a spoke, either direct or via the DR site.
If you equipment supports it, PfR (with PIRO) option would dynamically load balance across the two independent paths even when the routing cost isn't equal (nor is EIGRP variance needed). (NB: statically equal costing and PfR are not mutually exclusive.)
PS:
even with optimisation, the utilization for most sites has shot to over 70%
"Generic" 70% utilization could be meaningless if you also have QoS. With real traffic, 30% utilization could be too high and/or 100% is just fine. It really depends on your mix of traffic and its actual bandwidth needs. Some traffic needs bandwidth when it needs it, e.g. VoIP bearer. Other traffic will use whatever is available, including filling a pipe, but only needs enough bandwidth to satisfy a long term need, e.g. bulk data transfers.
WAAS is great when it works, but some traffic just doesn't optimize well. E.g. encrypted traffic and/or images.
03-08-2014 01:07 PM
you can configure link path costing so both the main site "looks" equal to/from a spoke, either direct or via the DR site.
Joseph means tuning the EIGRP metrics (bandwidth or rather delay) so that W1+D=W2 (metrics of WAN1, dark fiber, WAN2).
However, would you still regard the DR site as a DR site if half of the production spoke traffic is constantly flowing through it?
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide