How to Test EIGRP Load-Balancing

I have configured EIGRP on all routers.
From R1 I can see there are 2 unequal paths to get to loopback on R4, that 's after I used Variance command.

R1#sh ip eigrp topology 
EIGRP-IPv4 Topology Table for AS(1)/ID(
Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
       r - reply Status, s - sia Status 

P, 1 successors, FD is 30720
        via (30720/28160), FastEthernet0/0
P, 1 successors, FD is 33280
        via (33280/30720), FastEthernet0/0
        via (261120/28160), FastEthernet0/1
P, 1 successors, FD is 28160
        via Connected, FastEthernet0/0
P, 2 successors, FD is 158720
        via (158720/156160), FastEthernet0/0
        via (389120/156160), FastEthernet0/1
P, 1 successors, FD is 258560
        via Connected, FastEthernet0/1
        via (35840/33280), FastEthernet0/0


Open in new window

R1#sh ip route eigrp    
Codes: L - local, C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP
       D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area 
       N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
       E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2
       i - IS-IS, su - IS-IS summary, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2
       ia - IS-IS inter area, * - candidate default, U - per-user static route
       o - ODR, P - periodic downloaded static route, + - replicated route

Gateway of last resort is not set is subnetted, 1 subnets
D [90/389120] via, 01:04:06, FastEthernet0/1
                 [90/158720] via, 01:04:06, FastEthernet0/0
D [90/30720] via, 01:04:06, FastEthernet0/0
D [90/33280] via, 01:04:06, FastEthernet0/0

Open in new window

I tried Traceroute, but realized it will use just one path , even when I use that command over and over :Traceroute


Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to

  1 16 msec 52 msec 12 msec
  2 24 msec 28 msec 44 msec

Open in new window

the only time it took the other path through R2, is when I cleared EIGRP neighborship
R1#clear ip eigrp neighbors

it worked just one time though...

I am not sure if   Load-Balancing is working , but I am not using proper command to test, or it is not working...

Any help ?

Thank you
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Hemil AquinoNetwork EngineerCommented:
Always remember that those path called feasible successors are backup path in case of link failure.
Now, did you configure the bandwidth of each interface using different bandwidth? otherwise you will be using the same equal cost.
For example:

One link has bandwidth of 64k link
One link has bandwidth of 256k link

The way you can test it is trace route that ip you successor is this ip [90/389120] via, 01:04:06, FastEthernet0/1
if it respond with that ip. Good!. Now turn off that interface and try doing the same trace route. that way you will see it's working.

Remember Eigrp takes decision based on bandwidth and delay.

Let me know how it goes.
Since both EIGRP routes are placed in routing table with different cost traffic should be load balanced unequally. But generally, something is wrong with your output, path via should be preferred - since it is path with the lower cost (currently path that is taken is via I guessthat you run into GNS3 bug, try to save configurations and reload lab).
You can also increase number of probes during testing:
traceroute probe 5
jskfanAuthor Commented:
Sorry Predrag
I was increasing /decreasing the Bandwidth on R1 Fa0/1,   probably the output of topology and routing table was not at the same moment..

To answer Hemil Aquino, I believe what you area referring to is Fault- Tolerance, which means the feasible successor function will not kick in until the interface going through the Successor is down.

Load-Balancing should alternate between both paths... I could not find the good testing of it
Big Business Goals? Which KPIs Will Help You

The most successful MSPs rely on metrics – known as key performance indicators (KPIs) – for making informed decisions that help their businesses thrive, rather than just survive. This eBook provides an overview of the most important KPIs used by top MSPs.

jskfanAuthor Commented:
I guess the load-balancing works now, but It is an equal Load-Balancing:


Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to

  1 24 msec 16 msec 16 msec
  2 24 msec 24 msec 20 msec
jskfanAuthor Commented:
Unequal Load-balancing works now too, it is just I had to use  Traceroute  for 8 times , and it will choose one path then I  use it for about 20 times it will choose the other path...the ratio is about 20:8

Cannot find the command that will display the load-balancing ratio
jskfanAuthor Commented:
probably this is the right command:

R1#sh ip route
Routing entry for
  Known via "eigrp 1", distance 90, metric 158720, type internal
  Redistributing via eigrp 1
  Last update from on FastEthernet0/0, 00:11:29 ago
  Routing Descriptor Blocks:
  *, from, 00:11:29 ago, via FastEthernet0/1
      Route metric is 158720, traffic share count is 120
      Total delay is 5200 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 100000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 2, from, 00:11:29 ago, via FastEthernet0/0
      Route metric is 389120, traffic share count is 49
      Total delay is 5200 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 10000 Kbit
      Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1500 bytes
      Loading 1/255, Hops 2

Share count through is 120
Share count through is 49
is about 2.45.......Well that  's the math I did to come up with the rounded Variance Value of 3.. but I am not sure why using traceroute to     about 8 times it will keep showing as going through  before it will show the path through : and then use Traceroute about 20 times before I see it change back to the path through
jskfanAuthor Commented:
though 20/8 = 2.5  which is close to almost 2.45 (I picked Variance 3)
Variance 3 is just a measure what is the worst route that can be place in routing table. It defines that if feasible successor route cost is less than 3 x successor cost it will be placed in routing table and will be used for unequal load balancing.

Generally, you can calculate ratio manually:
feasible successor metric/successor metric : feasible successor metric/feasible successor metric
389120/158720 : 389120/389120
2.4516 : 1
If that is multiplied with 49 that is showed by sh ip route
120.1284 : 49

If feasible successor route has different cost, although variance is still 3, it will have different load balance ratio.

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
jskfanAuthor Commented:
Thank you Guys
You're welcome.
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.