nanog mailing list archives

RE: PPP multilink help


From: Matthew Huff <mhuff () ox com>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 12:32:03 -0400

I would also think the problem is with flow control not allowing the maximum bandwidth. Trying multiple ftp streams and 
seeing if that would max it out would help.

I would think you would want to add a WRED to the class-default entry to prevent global tcp synchronization

...
class class-default
  fair-queue 4096
  random-detect dscp-based

----
Matthew Huff       | One Manhattanville Rd
OTA Management LLC | Purchase, NY 10577
http://www.ox.com  | Phone: 914-460-4039
aim: matthewbhuff  | Fax:   914-460-4139


-----Original Message-----
From: Rodney Dunn [mailto:rodunn () cisco com] 
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 12:06 PM
To: Andrey Gordon
Cc: nanog () nanog org
Subject: Re: PPP multilink help

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 10:37:25AM -0400, Andrey Gordon wrote:
Hey folks, I'm sure to you it's peanuts, but I'm a bit puzzled (most likely
because of the lack of knowledge, I bet).

I'm buying an IP backbone from VNZ (presumably MPLS). I get a MLPPP hand off
on all sites, so I don't do the actual labeling and switching, so I guess
for practical purposes what I'm trying to say is that I have no physical
control over the other side of my MLPPP links.

When I transfer a large file over FTP (or CIFS, or anything else), I'd
expect it to max out either one or both T1,

Most MLPPP implementations don't has the flows at the IP layer to an
individual MLPPP member link. The bundle is a virtual L3 interface and
the packets themselves are distributed over the member links. Some people
reference it as a "load balancing" scenario vs. "load sharing" as the
traffic is given to the link that isn't currently "busy".

  but instead utilization on the
T1s is hoovering at 70% on both and sometimes MLPPP link utilization even
drops below 50%. What am I'm not gettting here?

If you have Multilink fragmentation disabled it sends a packet down each
path. It could be a reordering delay causing just enough variance in
the packet stream that the application thorttles back. If you have a bunch
of individual streams going you would probably see a higher throughput.
Remember there is additional overhead for the MLPPP.

Rodney



Tx,
Andrey

Below is a snip of my config.

controller T1 0/0/0
 cablelength long 0db
 channel-group 1 timeslots 1-24
!
controller T1 0/0/1
 cablelength long 0db
 channel-group 1 timeslots 1-24
!
ip nbar custom rdesktop tcp 3389
ip cef
!
class-map match-any VoIP
 match  dscp ef
class-map match-any interactive
 match protocol rdesktop
 match protocol telnet
 match protocol ssh
!
policy-map QWAS
 class VoIP
    priority 100
 class interactive
    bandwidth 500
 class class-default
    fair-queue 4096
!
interface Multilink1
 description Verizon Business MPLS Circuit
 ip address x.x.x.150 255.255.255.252
 ip flow ingress
 ip nat inside
 ip virtual-reassembly
 load-interval 30
 no peer neighbor-route
 ppp chap hostname R1
 ppp multilink
 ppp multilink links minimum 1
 ppp multilink group 1
 ppp multilink fragment disable
 service-policy output QWAS
!
interface Serial0/0/0:1
 no ip address
 ip flow ingress
 encapsulation ppp
 load-interval 30
 fair-queue 4096 256 0
 ppp chap hostname R1
 ppp multilink
 ppp multilink group 1
!
interface Serial0/0/1:1
 no ip address
 ip flow ingress
 encapsulation ppp
 load-interval 30
 fair-queue 4096 256 0
 ppp chap hostname R1
 ppp multilink
 ppp multilink group 1




-----
Andrey Gordon [andrey.gordon () gmail com]



Current thread: