Symantec Ghost across VLANS routed by cisco router

Apr 30, 2006 6 Replies
Symantec Ghost across VLANS routed by cisco router open original image

Thats the problem, i got it to work by reading from this community and added the lines "ip pim sparse-dense" to all vlan related interfaces.



Now my problem is that my symantec ghost sessions went from approx 5 -



7 minutes to now 20 - 30 mintues.

Thats unacceptable as anyone can see. What has gone wrong and why would this occur if my router is 2821, which has dual gigabit ethernet ports.



Thanks for your time.



Is the time difference you mentioned the difference between single-vlan multicasting and routed multicast traffic? Or did you mean the difference between unicast and routed multicast?

Ghost adjusts its multicast rate to the slowest system in the network (the Master Client). With multicasting enabled, Ghost may be reaching a very slow client on your net that you didn't see before. Even though you have gigabit ethernet ports, routing the multicast traffic will introduce some latency that wasn't present on a single VLAN.

even though the 2821 may have gigabit ports, it is unlikely that it has that much throughput capabilities (125MB per second). it probably has about 60 Mbps of forwarding capacity, so one asks why the gigabit interfaces to begin with - a marketing ploy by Cisco to make you think you're getting a big boy router!

Well you need a layer 3 switch like the 3750 to alleviate these problems... or ghost with> Is the time difference you mentioned the difference between single-vlan

where did you getthose specs on the 2821 router ?

We got one and actual throughput testing on our netowrk showed much higher than that.

I would like to see what the listed performance specs are supposed to be,

Thanks

formatting link

2821: 90,000 pps CEF, 87.04 megabit/s

Hmmm, by my reading of the table the 2821 does:-

2821 170,000 87.04

(the clue is that these figures are all in the same row:-))

The document states that this assumes min size Ethernet packets (512 bits)

If the average packet size is larger then the Mbps throughput will be larger.

170,000 pps could represent something close to full duplex Gigabit with 12,500 bit packets.

I have a 2811 here. Maybe I could give it a whirl. Probably not today though.

Opps, my eyes jumped lines when I was transcribing.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required