Hi MPI,

I am the moderator of this forum. I noticed you have not yet received an answer to this question yet. Unfortunately I do not have the technical information required to answer your question.

If this issue is urgent I suggest you log a Service Request call with EMC which will lead to a qucker response than the forums.

Kind regards,

Mark Browne

Mark, MPI, AFAIK FSPF allows to give different weight to different paths (ISL) .. But unfortunatly I didn't find how to change the weights.

Hi MPI,

We need a little more information to answer your question, however I'll try to answer based on the most likely scenarios...

Assuming the trunk and the CWDM link run between the same pair of switches and that you want all traffic to use the trunk and use the other link as a standby...

The best way to do this is by adjusting the link cost of the CWDM link (increase the cost of that link) as FSPF will always choose the lowest cost route (in this case the trunk) With this mechanism, the CWDM link will only be used if the trunk is unavaialble as it is always more "expensive". Take a look at the "linkcost" command in the FOS command reference for more details.


If you want certain devices to use one path or the other and have both active simultaneously...

Then you need to look at using static routing, however this is considerably more complicated. Take a look at the uRouteConfig command (also in the command reference) for more details. You have to specify the routes a port basis, and you may also wish to adjust the link costs to set a "preferred" path and manually set the other path for a subset of ports...

Hope that helps - give us some more details on exactly what you're trying to do if not...

Glen.

GREAT !! ThX for the commands .. I'm not a Brocade expert ... But I felt that it was possible

Thank you! Good to know that.

Best Regards
Manfred

You can also enable port based routing, and manually choose routes for each port, however this can become a pain to manage, but will give the ultimate in granularity. The problem with lowering a link cost is that it will prefer that path for all traffic. If you want to tune it down to specific ports, check out the "routeHelp" and "aptPolicy" commands and you can change your policy.

"static routing" is not that complicated. But yes as compare to "increasing cost".
This is routine job who the switch/router admninstrator..but i am not currently..

oh cool, do you know when FOS 6 is going to be GA ?

I was told fabos 6.x will be GA in early March08. I have been waiting for this anxiously. Hey Genious, what are the advantages of TI over urouteconfig?

What are the advantages of TI over urouteconfig?
Will TI work with exchang based routing policy? Or does it require port based routing policy? I was going to use urouteconfig to route port x traffic to port y only but it requires port based policy. I currently use exchange based policy and am concerned about negative performance impact if I change to port based policy.