Etherchannel load balancing options

Reading up on my Etherchannel load balancing options (src or dst, mac or IP) it seems to me that I don't have a good way of using Etherchannel to increase bandwidth in my situation. In my scenario, I have a Windows terminal server servicing a couple hundred users which are using a SQL database on a 2nd server. Both servers are on the same switch. Basically I only have one MAC and one IP. Is there a way to utilize multiple links in this scenario? It seems like I would need a packet based technique to take advantage of multiple channels and unfortunately that isn't an option with etherchannel. Thoughts?
Thanks,
Diego

Hi Diego,
If I understand you correctly, your scenario is similar to this
200users--Switch===channel===Switch--Server1+2
If that's how it is set up, then you have multiple source addresses with the same destination address. So if you select either 'source' or 'source and destination' as your frame distribution method, then you should have a pretty even distribution of traffic.
HTH,
Bobby
*Please rate helpful posts.

Similar Messages

Etherchannel Load-Balancing To Host (Confused)

I'm a bit confused as to how an etherchannel load-balances traffic across all the links, in the port-channel. If I have a 4 port etherchannel, to an AIX host, does the traffic load balance across all 4 ports? In reading the load-balancing documentation, it states that a global configuration of src-mac forwards traffic from the same host, over the same port, all the time, whereas it forwards traffic over different ports for other hosts. What if it's the same host tied into the port-channel? So if my AIX box has 4 ethernet cards in a port channel, each ethernet card goes over only one link? If the ethernet cards are bundled, into a port channel config, is there no way to load balance all the traffic? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the etherchannel configuration and how it works. Thanks for any and all help!!
Dan

Port channel is link aggregation for all traffic which will get distributed across all links. A given ip conversation will only travel down one of those links at any given time. The single ip conversation is not carried say for instance across all 4 links if it's a 4 port etherchannel.

Etherchannel Load balancing

I have three Gigabit aggregated with LACP to a IBM server. When I ask one ftp from this server I saw the performance is around 80 MB/s, if I ask two ftp to different equipmpents the performance is 160 MB/s (it uses 2 of the links of the bundle). However if I ask for three ftp the performance keeps in 160 MB/s although it uses the three links of the bundle. Is there a limit for Cisco? Anyone knows the reason? It seems like we can transmit as maximum at 160 MB/s

Glen is absolutely correct. on layer 2 switches EtherChannel load balancing can use either source-MAC or destination-MAC address forwarding.
With source-MAC address forwarding, when packets are forwarded to an EtherChannel, the packets are distributed across the ports in the channel based on the source-MAC address of the incoming packet. Therefore, to provide load balancing, packets from different hosts use different ports in the channel, but packets from the same host use the same port in the channel. With destination-MAC address forwarding, when packets are forwarded to an EtherChannel, the packets are distributed across the ports in the channel based on the destination host MAC address of the incoming packet. Therefore, packets to the same destination are forwarded over the same port, and packets to a different destination are sent on a different port in the channel.
So with every different source or destination mac it will use a diff link. If there is a session started on a aprticular link for a source to a destination it will keep on using the same link until the session termiantes or link goes down.
HTH, Please rate if it helps.
-amit singh

Etherchannel Load-Balance

Hi All,
I have one Catalyst 6509 connected to Catalyst 4500X-VSS using a Layer 2 Etherchannel.
So, 6509 are using src-dst-ip for Etherchannel Load Balance and 4500X are using src-dst-port.
Anyone knows if this will work fine or if I may have some problem?
Is recommended change that configuration or not?
Tks.

I agree with Karsten, That there would be any problem.
As you know Etherchannel is kind of load sharing among the links...It has its own way of load sharing/balancing the traffic if you leave it to default. (which means you might end up using the same link most often times if you dont change the default load balancing method). Hence we see people change the default method to the one which they want and get the nearest load sharing/balancing over the links utilization.
HTH
REgards
Inayath

Load Balancing Option while using SOA Direct

we are SOA Suite and Oracle Service Bus on separate domains/clusters. We will host the OSB Services on cluster which is load balanced using BIG IP. This primarliy load balances http requests. What are the load balancing options when when we make calls from BPEL to OSB. Using http we are good because of BIG IP. What about when if we use SOA-DIRECT?

here http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E17904_01/doc.1111/e15866/soa.htm t says
"The SOA-DIRECT transport supports the following features: .... Failover and load balancing (not available for services in the Service Callback role"
but it refers to OSB -> BPEL calls.... you are interested by BPEL -> OSB.... let me search further...

IPS etherchannel load balancing design

Is it possible to do a etherchannel load balancing with the design attached? i know I need to configure vlan pairs but I'm not sure if it's possible with my current design

Etherchannel design will work with interface pair as well ,provided the design is appropriate to take care of the asymmetry.
Coming to your design, if i understand the requirement correctly, you wish to create etherchannel between 3750 stacked switch and the pair of CAT6K. Enabling VSS on the pair of CAT6K switches and then creating etherchannel should help.But the flow symmetry will not be guaranteed ( meaning the same IPS may not see the forward and the reverse packets of the flow).

EtherChannel load-balance on Catalyst 6500 running CatOS

I know EtherChannel load balancing can use either MAC addresses, IP addresses, or the TCP port numbers.
1 Can I config it to make sure every port under the same Channel group has the same traffic utilization?
2 If one of the Etherchannel physical port has traffic more than its physical bandwidth, why switch can't use another Etherchannel physical port to share the traffic?

Normally it will fairly well balance the traffic . There is no way to make sure each channel is exactly the same utilization wise . You can look at how it is load balanced and make a change from say mac to ip address if it looks like you aren't getting the balance you want . It would be very rare that you are going to fill one port on the channel without filling the rest almost the same .Exceptions would be if you most of your traffic is headed to one place like a certain server , even then if you used ip addresses in both directions as the load balance I think it would balance out pretty good. If it got to that point where one link was almost filled you would have to think about adding another port to the channel . This is a real good page http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk213/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094714.shtml

Help choose the appropriate etherchannel load balance method

Hi
I have 2 network architectures :case A and case B (found architecture below)
Case A : one server connected on the switch on each site
Case B : 3 server connected on the switch behind a router on each site
2 site are connected by 2 wireless link :each wireless link have 105 Mbps bandwith (I absolutly need the agregate bandwith 210)
Site headquarter is the principal site and site backup is use to backup data located on the principal site
I use Gbit cisco 2960 switch
I use etherchannel to agregate the 2 switch port (port 1 and port 2) where the 2 wireless link are connected
I configure src-mac for case A but all trafic is send only on one wireless link .
Please help me to choose the more appropriate load balance method to load balance traffic between the 2 link for the case A and for the case B
Please advise
Thanks in advance

Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
Your Case A might be handled by port hashing, but unfortunately most Cisco platforms don't support it.
Your Case B isn't much better, as you only have 3 hosts on each side, and according to your drawing, they are behind routers, so you don't want to use MAC hashes. If you don't have port hashing, next best choice might be src-dest-IP hashing. Again, though, with just 3 hosts, your distribution will likely not be very balanced, especially over shorter time intervals.
To obtain best utilization of your links, you need some kind of better link bonding, such as MLPPP (unfortunately, usually won't scale to FE rates) or a hardware MUX. Next best option, if you could route across the links, would be something like Cisco's OER/PfR which can dynamically load balance.

HTTP type connectivity between XI and R3 - load balancing options ?

Hi
We have a http type connectivity setup between XI and R3 in order enable XI to communicate with R3 using ABAP proxies. We did this by creating a RFC destination on the ABAP stack of XI of type 'H' ( http connection between R3 systems ). Now, while setting up this rfc destination, there is no option to specify a message server on R3 - we just see a target server field that can be filled in.
In an rfc destination of type 3 - on the XI box ( which is used for a XI --> R3 idoc adapter ) , I can see an option for specifying message server.
Does this mean that using type 'H' connectivity between XI and R3 does not give us an option of hitting the load balancing - message server on R3 and thus cannot use the load balancing setup on R3 ? Is this is a limitation of type 'H' connectivity between XI and R3 ?

for HTTP load balancing the options seems to be somewhat different....check if these threads provide you any help:
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04s/helpdata/en/ae/9bfc3f9ec4e669e10000000a155106/content.htm
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/79/a1ce9569444647956b0ec1cf443c4d/content.htm
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw70/helpdata/en/43/39c7b227b91bcbe10000000a1553f7/content.htm
Regards,
Abhishek.

IPS-Portchannel-EtherChannel Load Balancing

I have two 4506 switches and 2 IPS 4260
I have problem med Interfaces unjoin and join portchannel
GigabitEthernet3/23 left the port-channel Port-channel1
GigabitEthernet3/23 joined port-channel Port-channel1
The IPS interfaces
UDVIK01_AWG_IPS# sh interfaces brief
CC   Interface            Sensing State   Link   Inline Mode        Pair Status
*    Management0/0        Disabled        Up
     GigabitEthernet0/1   Disabled        Down   Unpaired           N/A
     GigabitEthernet2/0   Enabled         Up     Inline-vlan-pair   N/A
     GigabitEthernet2/1   Enabled         Up     Inline-vlan-pair   N/A
     GigabitEthernet2/2   Disabled        Down   Unpaired           N/A
     GigabitEthernet2/3   Disabled        Down   Unpaired           N/A
I have uploaded Debug file and other file of my configuration
Best Regard
Rene Rolsted

Debug from switch:
Dec 8 15:11:41.363: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: for agport Po1
Dec 8 15:11:41.363: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: PAgP not enabled on agport Po1
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_port_down: Gi3/23 Inform yes
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_invoke_port_down: Gi3/23
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: fec_unbundle: Gi3/23
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_change_vgc: gcchngreq == 0 for Gi3/23
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_change_vgc: Gi3/23 gcchngreq = 0 gc = 0
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: %EC-5-UNBUNDLE: Interface GigabitEthernet3/23 left the port-channel Port-channel1
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_delete_port_from_agport_internal: delete_port_from_agport: for port Gi3/23
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: delete port (Gi3/23) from agport (Po1)
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_delete_port_from_agport_list: afb->nports-- = 1 [Gi3/23]
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: Un-Bndl msg NOT send to PM for port Gi3/23 from Po1
Dec 8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_reset_load_index: reading load-index for port Po1
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_port_up: Gi3/23
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_invoke_port_up: Gi3/23
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_agc_compatable: comparing GC values of Gi3/23 Gi3/24 flag = 1 1
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_port_attrib_diff: Gi3/23 Gi3/24 same
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_agc_compatable: GC values are compatable
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: fec_bundle: Gi3/23
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: add port (Gi3/23) to agport (Po1)
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_add_port_to_agport_list: afb->nports++ = 2 [Gi3/23]
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: %EC-5-BUNDLE: Interface GigabitEthernet3/23 joined port-channel Port-channel1
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_add_port_to_agport_internal: msg to PM to bundle port Gi3/23 with Po1
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_want_to_bundle: Bndl msg to PM for port Gi3/23 to Agport Po1
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: for agport Po1
Dec 8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: PAgP not enabled on agport Po1
Dec 8 15:11:45.367: FEC: pagp_switch_reset_load_index: reading load-index for port Po1
Dec 8 15:12:08.370: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: for agport Po1
Dec 8 15:12:08.370: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: PAgP not enabled on agport Po1
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_port_down: Gi3/24 Inform yes
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_invoke_port_down: Gi3/24
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: fec_unbundle: Gi3/24
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_change_vgc: gcchngreq == 0 for Gi3/24
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_change_vgc: Gi3/24 gcchngreq = 0 gc = 0
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: %EC-5-UNBUNDLE: Interface GigabitEthernet3/24 left the port-channel Port-channel1
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_delete_port_from_agport_internal: delete_port_from_agport: for port Gi3/24
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: delete port (Gi3/24) from agport (Po1)
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_delete_port_from_agport_list: afb->nports-- = 1 [Gi3/24]
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: Un-Bndl msg NOT send to PM for port Gi3/24 from Po1
Dec 8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_reset_load_index: reading load-index for port Po1
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_port_up: Gi3/24
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_invoke_port_up: Gi3/24
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_agc_compatable: comparing GC values of Gi3/24 Gi3/23 flag = 1 1
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_port_attrib_diff: Gi3/24 Gi3/23 same
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_agc_compatable: GC values are compatable
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: fec_bundle: Gi3/24
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: add port (Gi3/24) to agport (Po1)
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_add_port_to_agport_list: afb->nports++ = 2 [Gi3/24]
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: %EC-5-BUNDLE: Interface GigabitEthernet3/24 joined port-channel Port-channel1
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_add_port_to_agport_internal: msg to PM to bundle port Gi3/24 with Po1
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_want_to_bundle: Bndl msg to PM for port Gi3/24 to Agport Po1
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: for agport Po1
Dec 8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: PAgP not enabled on agport Po1
Dec 8 15:12:13.366: FEC: pagp_switch_reset_load_index: reading load-index for port Po1

Unequal Load Balance on Etherchannel (L2/SW3400ME)

Hi, i have a problem with my L2 port-channel between 2 SW ME-3400-24TS-D (12.2(44)SE5), there is a unequal load balance and i don't know how to fixed. Should I change the load balance method?.
All four ports have the same config, except one (int fa0/1 on SW_2) that have this commands:
MAMANIVLN1P1IRA1#SH RUN INT FA0/1 | INC hold
hold-queue 4096 in
hold-queue 4096 out
Should i change this hold-queue config?
Here more outputs where you can see the diference, one link has 2mb and the other link has 60mb,, that's a big diference, i would like to know how to solve this:
SW_1#sh int fa0/9 | inc (Desc|rate)
Description: !!!!!! HACIA SW_2 !!!!!
Queueing strategy: fifo
5 minute input rate 2088000 bits/sec, 2065 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 25000 bits/sec, 46 packets/sec
SW_1#sh int fa0/10 | inc (Desc|rate)
Description: PORTCHANNEL10 HACIA SW_2
Queueing strategy: fifo
5 minute input rate 1905000 bits/sec, 1948 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 63348000 bits/sec, 6095 packets/sec
SW_2#sh int fa0/1 | inc (Desc|rate)
Description: Hacia SW_1_Fa0/9
Queueing strategy: fifo
30 second input rate 27000 bits/sec, 48 packets/sec
30 second output rate 2385000 bits/sec, 1996 packets/sec
SW_2#sh int fa0/2 | inc (Desc|rate)
Description: PORTCHANNEL10 HACIA SW_1
Queueing strategy: fifo
5 minute input rate 63567000 bits/sec, 6114 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 1935000 bits/sec, 1976 packets/sec
more outputs...
SW_1#sh etherchannel load-balance
EtherChannel Load-Balancing Configuration:
src-mac
EtherChannel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
Non-IP: Source MAC address
IPv4: Source MAC address
SW_2#sh etherchannel load-balance
EtherChannel Load-Balancing Configuration:
src-mac
EtherChannel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
Non-IP: Source MAC address
IPv4: Source MAC address
SW_1#SH MAC ADDress-table INTerface po10 | inc Total
Total Mac Addresses for this criterion: 297
SW_2#SH MAC ADDress-table INTerface po10 | inc Total
Total Mac Addresses for this criterion: 66
In advance thanks for the help.

Normally it will fairly well balance the traffic . There is no way to make sure each channel is exactly the same utilization wise . You can look at how it is load balanced and make a change from say mac to ip address if it looks like you aren't getting the balance you want . It would be very rare that you are going to fill one port on the channel without filling the rest almost the same .Exceptions would be if you most of your traffic is headed to one place like a certain server , even then if you used ip addresses in both directions as the load balance I think it would balance out pretty good. If it got to that point where one link was almost filled you would have to think about adding another port to the channel . This is a real good page http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk213/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094714.shtml

Error in creation of JCO with Load balancing server

Hi,
We are using a ABAP user base for our WEBAS server 6.40 (with ABAP+JAVA). i have created a Public group in concerned ECC 5.0 system. I have already configured SLD, and then i maintain data supplier bridge in SLD and run RZ70 in ECC 5.0 system to load system information.. i can see details in SLD ..
now i am trying to create JCO connections .. here i am unable to create JCO with load balancing option.. i get
com.sap.mw.jco.JCO$Exception: (102) RFC_ERROR_COMMUNICATION: Connect to message server host failed Connect_PM TYPE=B MSHOST=<servername> GROUP=PUBLIC R3NAME=SID MSSERV=sapms<SID> PCS=1 ERROR service 'sapms<SID>' unknown TIME Fri Jun 16 12:41:20 2006 RELEASE 640 COMPONENT NI (network interface) VERSION 37 RC -3 MODULE ninti.c LINE 505 DETAIL NiPGetServByName2: service 'sapms<SID>' not found SYSTEM CALL getservbyname_r COUNTER 1
i am able to create single server JCO, but it fails in load balancing.. is there anything i have missed out in settings...
Thanks and regards,
Sudhir

Thanks, Bogdan Rokosa
I have the same problem,and solved it following the steps provided by Bogdan Rokosa :
you must insert an entry for your R3 system
(like: sapms<SID> 3600/tcp)
in services file
(C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc\services) on Java WAS.
I test the Jco successful without restart J2EE Engine.

Exposing a webservice on ECC 5.0 in a load balancing setup

Hi
We have a webservice exposed on ECC 5.0 that is being invoked by an external system. When we move this webservice to our production environment - which is load balanced and has a logon group setup - we need to be able to expose this webservice - not on a single application server - but be available on the logon group ( message server ) so that the url that we provide for the webservice to the external system does not contain a single application server - but points to the logon group. We do not have a web dispatcher in our environment/architecture.
How do we go about exposing this point-to-point webservice on ECC 5.0 in a load balanced setup ? Any suggestions, experiences that can be shared ?

This can be done though SICF.
If you click on a service, their is a service data tab.
underthat tab is a Load Balancing option.
This then points the service at the SMLG logon group.
Regards
James

RFC Sender (XI 3.0, SP14) Load Balancing doesn't work

Hi all,
We're "desperately" trying to use the Load Balancing option of RFC Sender Adapter (XI 3.0, SP14). It doesn't work.
The Adapter can not register to the sender SAP server. But when we do not use the "Load Balancing" option, everything works well.
We did follow the XI guidelines step-by-step. All necessary configurations in XI and in SAP sender system (TA: SM59) are "properly" done and reviewed by different experts several times.
Do you have, by chance any running scenario using "Load Balancing" within a RFC Adapter? If yes, I would appreciate if you can share it with me.
Thanks a lot!
Regards,
Khaled

Hello Khaled,
the RFC sender adapter registers a program at the SAP Gateway. Load Balancing for the Sender Adapter means, that you have at least two J2EE server nodes within your XI installation. On all these server nodes the same RFC sender adapter is started and register the same program at the same gateway. The load balancing is then handled by the gateway. That means, that for the sender adapter the settings are the same, even if you use load balancing or not.
The settings are, e.g.
- SID=ABC
- hostname=abchost (central instance, message server)
- hostname=xyzhost (additional dialog instance of ABC)
- instance nr=00
application server (gateway): xi1host
application server service (gw-service): sapgw00
programm id: could be freely choosen
The Metadata Repository could be connected using load balancing. Here a user need to log on to the system.
The settings here must be:
Message-Server: abchost
Message-Server-Service: sapmsABC
System-ID: ABC
Logon-Group: e.g. PUBLIC; this logon group need to be created in system ABC using transaction SMLG
For the RFC-Receiver Adapter the same settings as for the Metadata could be used.
Keep in mind, that for the RFC Sender Adapter a RFC connection of type T must be created in transaction SM59 in system ABC.
Rgds.,
Andreas

Load Balancing on RDS 2012 R2 does not work

Hello,
I'm working on a test deployment with 3 Session Hosts, GW/WA/CB on one server and licensing on another.
GW and CB are also on a Failover cluster so i don't want High Availability now (I want to start with simpler and work out the errors first)
One issue is when I try load balancing option on my Collection's Properties by changing the relative weight of the servers, nothing happens at all. All the sessions are created on a single server (GW/WA/CB) and nothing on the server I want to redirect to.
Any help is appreciated!

Hi,
Thank you for posting in Windows Server Forum.
Please see that you have added following registry key to the connection broker.
HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\TerminalServer\ClusterSettings
DefaultTsvUrl tsv://VMResource.1.Virtualpool1
After this you can use “mstsc /admin” to perform remote desktop.
In addition, we can use DNS RR method to configure Load Balancing. Please check below thread for information.
2012 R2 Load-Balanced RDS farm
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/2ec5e96e-7ca6-44b5-85f8-5286c6881dea/2012-r2-loadbalanced-rds-farm?forum=winserverTS
Hope it helps!
Thanks.
Dharmesh Solanki
TechNet Community Support

Etherchannel load balancing options

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for