On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Nigel Clarke wrote:
> Performance is an issue. The routers have a problem with processing and
> redirecting the traffic toward WCCP1 participant. You can try all the
> modifications you want, this protocol does not work faster than WCCP2.
> I've worked closely with Cisco engineers on this one.
The two protocols are mostly identical in how traffic is redirected when
using GRE/WCCP encapsulation except that WCCPv2 adds some extra overhead
due to an additional 8 octet packet header.
The main differences is in the control WCCP protocol which only exchanges
very few periodic messages, totally independent of the intercepted
traffic.
If using direct routing (L2 redirection) then sure there might be
situations where WCCPv2 performs better, especially for file uploads and
other transmissions involving large packets beeing send by the client to
the Internet.
> The problem was the routers redirection performance. Despite all the
> configuration options that were tried, none of them really improved the
> performance. Cisco's Cache team was not to much of a help in this
> matter.
>
> Their answer was upgrading to WCCP 2 because WCCP1 does not perform the
> effectively.
Which is almost certainly an IOS bug in how WCCPv1 is/was implemented on
this router.
> WCCP1s lack of security should be the reason that any administrator should
> want to migrate to version 2.
Agreed.
Regards
Henrik
Received on Sun Dec 08 2002 - 16:52:33 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Tue Dec 09 2003 - 17:11:55 MST