Link to home
Create AccountLog in
Avatar of shockey
shockey

asked on

Bonding 2 point to points with mlppp. missing a few details.

I am in the process of configuring 2 new Cisco 2811 routers for 2 new point to point (P2P) T1 circuits that will be bonded.  I'm using 2 WIC-1DSU-T1-V2 on each router (1 for each of the 2 circuits). From research here, I've completed most of the config using mlppp, although I have a few questions, please note I've never bonded a circuit before.  There is currently a single P2P circuit in place with older 2600 series routers.

On the existing single circuit P2P between the 2 sites both sides have a "service-module t1 timeslots 1-24" statement for the serial interface.  On the new install will Both of the serial interfaces on each router need this statement since there are now 2 serial interfaces?  Also, will Both of the serial interfaces on one side of the circuit need the " service-module t1 clock source internal" statement?

Question 2 - on the existing single circuit P2P I have a "priority-group 1" statement applied to the single serial interface in use for a priority list that is defined in the config.  On the new install will I apply the "priority-group 1" statement to the multilink1 interface instead?  

Thanks in advance.  I hope to try to test the new circuits/routers/config tomorrow.
Avatar of shockey
shockey

ASKER

I'm about to start testing this new bonded solution on a pair of new point to point T1s.  I've been doing some reading on a few cisco links provided from this site and now have some addtional questions.  Currently, based on research from this site, a section of my config looks like this:

interface Multilink1
 ip address 192.168.3.6 255.255.255.0
 ppp multilink
 ppp multilink group 1
!
!
interface Serial0/1/0
 no ip address
 encapsulation ppp
 ppp multilink
 ppp multilink group 1
!
interface Serial0/0/0
 no ip address
 encapsulation ppp
 ppp multilink
 ppp multilink group 1

After reading from links mentioned above, I'm curious if I need to apply traffic classes or traffic policies to this multilink.  I haven't heard this prequisite before and didnt read about it on any other posts regarding bonding circuits via mlppp.  I'm also unlcear on whether I need to use/define the fragment, interleave and multiclass statements associated with the multilink?  Any help or clarification is greatly appreciated.
Avatar of Les Moore
I would not start out with any QoS features enabled with any policing policies unless and until you find that you need them.
Config looks clean. Simple is best.
Avatar of shockey

ASKER

What about the "service-module t1 timeslots 1-24" statements, do they need to be on each of the 2 serial interfaces?  

Since we are currently using a priority group (assingned to the serial interface) to prioritize ip traffic on specific ports for our Inter-tel phone traffic, how will this change witht the new setup of the 2 bonded circuits.  Will I now apply this priorty group to the multilink1 interface rather than to both of the serial interfaces?   Thanks.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of Les Moore
Les Moore
Flag of United States of America image

Link to home
membership
Create an account to see this answer
Signing up is free. No credit card required.
Create Account
Avatar of shockey

ASKER

lrmoore,
after speaking with our phone system provider I suspect we may have an issue with voice quality.  To determine this, I need to get a few more questions clarifiied.  We have phone systems on both ends of this proposed mulilink solution, they communicate between each other via VOIP on the existing single T1.  Our provider is concerned that with the bonded solution packets may leave (these are UDP) and travel down separate physical circuits and not show up out of order on the other end.  Question 1:  Is there a way to dedicate bandwidth for VOIP in a mulitlink environment.  If so, will the dedicated amount always be on a portion of a single physical circuit?  I'm afraid that if the VOIP traffic is always going to interleave between the 2 bonded circuits between these 2 sites that we may end up with worse quality voice service than what we currently have with the VOIP and data using a single T1.  Your thoughts?