Re: FEC (Fast Etherchannel) issues

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck Nether net>]

        Yes, this is what I understand is the case.

        Most people I know that are talking about pushing this much
traffic can use the PA-2FE and load-share, or use the POS OC3 pa.

        - jared

On Thu, Mar 18, 1999 at 11:26:46PM +0000, Tony Bourke wrote:
> This looks kinda like the right place for this issue, apologies if not:
>
> True or False?
>
> FEC (Fast EtherChannel) is not suibtable for router to router trunking
> because of the way FEC load balances
>
> I've heard and read in various places (although nothing conclusive) that
> since FEC uses the last portion of a MAC address and hashs it to determine
> which 100 meg link a packet goes.  This is to prevent packets from
> arriving on the other end out of order.
>
> This would seem to suggest that FEC wouldn't work between routers or
> similar layouts because there is only one MAC address on either end,
> therefor packets would always go over the same link.  
>
> Anybody have concrete details on this issue?  Does FEC actually determine
> load balancing this say? is ther another way to configure this?  
>
> I'm not real fond of FEC myself, and would like substantiated evidence in
> an argument against it.

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared () puck nether net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.