I wouldn't assume any gain in efficiency. I think you're saying the two
or more VLAN's each have their default gateway on logical VLAN
interfaces under the same physical interface. A packet coming in one
and out another still has to have the destination IP compared to the
routing table to find a matching route. It's tempting to imagine that
it made a hairpin turn and never left the interface, but a more
realistic block diagram would show the packet going through the
interface to the system CPU and then back out. Whether it went out the
same physical interface or a different one shouldn't change
anything......or so I'd assume.
On 2/16/2021 4:12 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
Is there any component of the routing stack that it skips through
since it doesnt traverse interfaces? On the backhaul side of things
traffic just flows without any policy or anything, I have INPUT chain
rules and things for the site LAN So I dont think there is much that
would happen to miss. I dont know though.
Im going to have these all turned into BMUs so I dont know what
happens there either, have to make sure powercode isnt dicking with
traffic
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 11:10 AM Josh Luthman
<j...@imaginenetworksllc.com <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
It's packet processing. However much it needs to do. If you're
just tagging a VLAN through the device I think that can be done on
the switch level and it can do wire speed. If you're doing OSPF
between two interfaces, you're processing every packet and will
need a bigger CPU for more traffic.
Asking good questions means you're not a dumbass :)
Josh Luthman
24/7 Help Desk: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:07 PM Steve Jones
<thatoneguyst...@gmail.com <mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
In my case we are probably going to be sticking with Mikrotik
for now, but I assume its similar for most hardware.
Where is the "load" when routing VLANs on the same physical port.
Backhauls of any capacity are almost all moving to SFP+ to
support gigabit and up capacity. APs are starting to come with
cages as well.
We dont have the cage count. Looking at our options, combined
with the limitations powercode imposes, we have decided to
stick with the RB4011 moving forward for our site routers and
and external switch for our SFP+ cage count, probably
something like CRS309 or something of that nature as long as
we stay under 7 SFP+ needed and trunk to the router via its
single SFP+
so most of the routing will happen on the same physical port
with the exception of the remaining copper backhauls.
We will probably use our current procurves until they die off
to add more LAN copper for APs where needed, but there may be
APs like Medusas on the CRS as well.
we currently only have a total of 2 Gbps upstream capacity,
that will probably double over the next year or so, so its not
like we are running massive bandwidth, we currently max around
100-150k pps on our heaviest CCR so we wont hit that cap soon.
I dont know how the test results throughput is calculated, is
that distributed across al ports, its that the capability per
port? a mix of them?
I usually try to keep backhauls and LAN on different switch
chips, but what will be handling the traffic when most of it
is on the same physical port?
I wont feel bad if you call me a dumbass for not knowing this
type of shit this far into the game, I have thick skin, but
would still like to understand whats happenning and what kind
of issues Im about to cause myself
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
<http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
<http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
