I have configured Link Aggregation on two SF300 Switch

The two links connect to both switches via two radios. The problem is that I am unable to access the http interface of the attached radios:
Everything else is working fine and the radios are passing data according to PRTG monitoring of the attached equipment
Thank you

Well it looks like that is it.
Based on it, it looks like you can never manage your bridges due to this.
This is due to the concept of the etherchannel and how it operates
The L3 Packets coming from the management IP of the bridges can never be process because the etherchannel does not recognize it. It only processes packets from its peer, etherchannel port to etherchannel port.
All in all, you cant manage your bridges, to put it simply

Similar Messages

Link aggregation stradling two switches?

Hey guys, I'm back with more questions about Link agregation. I figured out that I do have to manually configure both of my switches to support it. Now though I'm stuck with trying to figure out the best way to implement it. I have a Netgear FSM726 and a Linksys EF24G2. Both are 24-port 100BT switches with 2 Gigabit ports on them. They are currently setup like this: The Xserve runs with one gigabit port going into one of the gigabit ports on the Linksys. The other gigabit port on the linksys runs into the Netgear to join the two together. That leaves one open gigabit port on the netgear.
So in order to setup link aggregation I'd have to use two gigabit ports on one of the switches, or use two 100BT ports. Alternatively, I was thinking if I setup link aggregation on the Xserve and then just ran each of the two lines into one gigabit port on both switches it may work without having to do any configuring on the switches? Will that cause any problems with network traffic?
If I go with the gigabit port on one switch idea, as far as I see, I'd have to join the two switches with a 100BT connection instead of the current gigabit line. I'm not even sure if that matters really. So which way is a better way to go? Also, if I go with using the gigabit ports on one switch, can I use two open 100BT ports to join into the other switch for increased bandwidth? Thanks for helping out here.

Steve has it right. Link aggregation only works between two devices (e.g. a server and a switch, or two switches). You cannot link three devices (a server and two switches) using a single link aggregation. That's because of how the traffic flows over the link.
Your best solution depends on the traffic patterns on your network - where are the clients that are hitting this server?
If you have a dozen clients that hit the server a lot, plus more clients that don't hit it much (or at all), plus printers, etc., you could use two of the gigabit ports on one switch as a link aggregate to the server and plug the busy clients into that switch, then plug the other clients into the other switch, using a 100base-T link (or multiple 100base-T links) to connect to two switches together.
This may or may not be viable, in which case a separate gigabit switch to connect the server and the two existing switches may be the best solution.

Fedora and SRW2024 link aggregation

Usually I am reluctant to criticize products, but this time I decided to get it out of my chest.
For people considering purchase of Linksys SRW2024 I would rather suggest to think twice before making this step.
Let’s cut to the chase... Recently I have built iSCSI storage with 2x 1Gbit NIC (Inter 1000PT) for my ESX server and the only missing ingredient was a dissent gigabit switch. Eventually I got SRW2024 as according to Linksys specs it supports VLANs and Link Aggregation etc. After configuring Fedora distro for link bonding I was unable to ping any of the hosts on the network (172.16.192.0/24). I checked the status of individual NICs and a configuration on the switch million of times, but I couldn’t find anything that was out of ordinary. In order to eliminate issues with NIC bonding on Fedora system I used my old DES3226 Layer 2 switch... and guess what? It worked just fine.
Next obvious step was to upgrade firmware from 1.2.1 to 1.2.2 (hardware version 1.2), but yet again... NO LUCK.
My question to Linksys Support or anyone who come across the same issue is – Are you aware of the issue and if so please did you find the solution as I have found number of users having similar problems!

Hi, the topic is quite old, but I am facing the same problem. We have three SRW2024 Switches. The LACP between the Switches is working, but I want to use the 802.3ad (EtherNet Link Aggregation) with two Xserves, but can´t get it working. The Linksys-Support is unable to help, because they ignore Apple-Products and name it an Apple-problem. Witch Firmware do You use on Your SRW2024? Many thanks in advance Regards svenc
Message Edited by svenc on 03-14-2008 01:16 AM

How to set up Link Aggregation on Windows 7 ?

I am going to buy a new Switcher that is LACP (Link Aggregation Control Protocol) supported so I can get a little bit better internet by combining my two ethernet ports on my MacPro (Mid 2012) where i have Windows 7 Ultimate installed as well as Mac OSx. On Mac OSx it is easy to set up Link Aggregation takes only 30 sec by going to Manage Virtual Interfaces and click round (for doing this you need a Link Aggregation supported router or switcher), but on Windows it seems to be a little bit harder after looking around for a while now. Is there anyone here who knows how to do it or know if its possible to set up Link Aggregation on Windows 7 ?
I'll be thankful for any help i can get

hehe I thought over that too
But since I dont got a windows forum account I thought of asking here fisrst

Link aggregation - performance overhead?

Does anybody know if Solaris link aggregation incurs any performance degredation compared with non-redundant network connections?
We've recently upgraded a client system and have enabled link aggregation to bind two interfaces (bge) to a logical aggregated interface.
Apart from the server hardware upgrade, which brought a change from ce to bge interfaces, this is the only other significant network change.
On this heavily used system, database network performance has degraded significantly, and being the only significant network change I'm wondering whether link aggregation could be a cause.
Reading through Sunsolve articles and man pages, there doesn't appear to be anything categorically stating aggregation imposes a cost overhead.
However, I'd be interested to hear from others if they've experienced this.
For what it's worth, this is Solaris 10 10/09 on an Ultrasparc VII.

So many considerations when you talk about performance: what system hardware in use? how many interfaces? is this a CoolThreads "T" server (where single threaded programs don't run as well as multi-threaded); what do you mean by "database network performance has degraded"; does the DB need to be tuned or adjusted for this? If using add-on cards, are they in the most optimal slot (some platforms) and don't go over the recommended # of interface boards supported by the system? different storage array or config for you DB?
when cases like these come in, there typically is a discussion that needs to take place around those questions as well as what/when/where and expectations like those described here: http://blogs.sun.com/hippy/entry/what_s_the_answer_to
also understand that link aggregation does not necessarily mean that you will see a balancing of the load evenly b/t 2 or more aggregated interfaces. The default policy is "L4" which decides the outbound interface by TCP and UDP info if found in the packet, not by simple source/destination or mac address hashing, although you can set those with -P if you want. You can also set multiple policies. (-P L2,L3).
So it /could/ be related to the aggregation change you made, but you also upgraded this DB machine from some other system, so there ARE other differences. Were you using link aggregation on the previous system or Sun Trunking? What type of CPU was that other system?
that's all I can think of, but hopefully you get the idea.

SRW224G4 and 2960 Link Aggregation LACP problem

Hello
WE have Linksys SRW224G4 and Cisco 2960 switches.
We made link aggregation onboth two ports between them, all is working except that when I make continuous ping between them it fails every 90 seconds one ping. I saw the problem is , when I connect to SRW224G4 by telnet and go CTRL+Z and lcli , and login, I got console. Every 90 seconds I got this messages:
01-Jan-2000 22:14:49 %TRUNK-W-PORTREMOVED: Port g2 removed from ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %TRUNK-W-PORTREMOVED: Port g1 removed from ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %LINK-W-Down: ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %TRUNK-I-PORTADDED: Port g1 added to ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %LINK-I-Up: ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:56 %TRUNK-I-PORTADDED: Port g2 added to ch1
So after this one ping fails, and it goes good next 90 seconds, and then again same group of same messages and one ping fails.
I tried all options to change on Linksys and nothing, still i got this link down and up and one ping failed.
Did someone had same problem, can you help me somehow.
THank you
Hrvoje Pastar

Hello
WE have Linksys SRW224G4 and Cisco 2960 switches.
We made link aggregation onboth two ports between them, all is working except that when I make continuous ping between them it fails every 90 seconds one ping. I saw the problem is , when I connect to SRW224G4 by telnet and go CTRL+Z and lcli , and login, I got console. Every 90 seconds I got this messages:
01-Jan-2000 22:14:49 %TRUNK-W-PORTREMOVED: Port g2 removed from ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %TRUNK-W-PORTREMOVED: Port g1 removed from ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %LINK-W-Down: ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %TRUNK-I-PORTADDED: Port g1 added to ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %LINK-I-Up: ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:56 %TRUNK-I-PORTADDED: Port g2 added to ch1
So after this one ping fails, and it goes good next 90 seconds, and then again same group of same messages and one ping fails.
I tried all options to change on Linksys and nothing, still i got this link down and up and one ping failed.
Did someone had same problem, can you help me somehow.
THank you
Hrvoje Pastar

Intel, Link Aggregation, 10.4.8 Server

Trying to narrow down a problem to see if it's just the Intel Ethernet Chipset or maybe just the Mac Pro. Some with a G5 PowerMac Xserv Mac OS X (10.4.8) posted a ifconfig that was correct in my open issue topic under Server/Networking. Was hoping to find an Intel user with Link Aggregation
active to any switch that could post an ifconfig -b bond0 results.
It is the MAC address setup on the Mac Pro via network setup. Here is my ifconfig.
<pre>osxserver:~ root# ifconfig -b bond0
bond0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet6 fe80::217:f2ff:fe00:1012%bond0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x7
inet 192.30.40.2 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.30.40.255
ether 00:17:f2:00:10:12
media: autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex,flow-control>) status: active
supported media: autoselect
bond key: 0x0001 interfaces: en0 (selected) en1 (unselected)
bond interface: en0 priority: 0x8000 state: 0xbd partner system: 0x0001,00:0f:3d:f8:12:8f key: 0x0013 port: 0x0013 priority: 0x0001 state: 0x37
bond interface: en1 priority: 0x8000 state: 0x05 partner system: 0x0001,00:0f:3d:f8:12:8f key: 0x0013 port: 0x0014 priority: 0x0001 state: 0x37</pre>
See my "ether" address it DOES NOT match the MAC addresses assigned to the Bonded en0 & en1 as yours does.
<pre>osxserver:~ root# networksetup -listBonds
interface name: bond0
user-defined-name: bond0
devices: en0, en1
}</pre>
Please does anyone know what CLI commands will fix this?

I'm having too problems with the Link Aggregation on an Intel Xserve with 10.4.8. In contrast to your ifconfig my output shows me that the bond seems to have lost its ethernet adress completely:
xserve1:~ isdadmin$ ifconfig -b bond0
bond0: flags=8842<BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 9000
ether 00:17:f2:93:7d:f8
media: autoselect status: inactive
supported media: autoselect
bond key: 0x0001 interfaces: en0 (unselected) en1 (unselected)
bond interface: en0 priority: 0x8000 state: 0x45 partner system: 0x0000,00:00:00:00:00:00 key: 0x0000 port: 0x0000 priority: 0x0000 state: 0x00
bond interface: en1 priority: 0x8000 state: 0x45 partner system: 0x0000,00:00:00:00:00:00 key: 0x0000 port: 0x0000 priority: 0x0000 state: 0x00
On the last two lines there are only "0". In the status panel in system preferences it states that the switch seems to not supporting 802.3ad though it does and is activated for the connected ports.
I hope that if it is a system fault it will be corrected in 10.4.9.
Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Best Switch to use for Link Aggregation

Looking to buy a new switch and was hoping that someone is already doing link aggregation on a current switch. Looking for 48 ports, I have a lot of Xserves.
What model have you had the best luck with? THX

Switches are like so many other things in life - you get what you pay for.
Sometimes you can pay less and get enough (i.e. it works well enough)
Sometimes you can pay less and not know what you're missing (you don't know what some of those advanced features are anyway, even though they could be useful)
Sometimes you pay more and get features you don't need/want/understand
Sometimes you find just the right option.
Start off by determining the importance to your business. If the switch blows out and all your servers go dark, how much will that cost you if it takes an hour to get it back up? 4 hours? a minute?
Look also at how much traffic you're pushing through your network. If you just need ports but aren't pushing many packets then a cheaper switch may suffice, but if you need every port to run at full line rate with no packet drops then you need something bigger.
Do you need the switch to just pass traffic, or do you want statistics (e.g. SNMP, RMON, etc.) so you can track which ports are busiest?
Then, of course, there's a budget. It could be $100. It could be $10,000. Your options are limited at $100, but $10K will cover a lot of options.
While you're doing this, consider expansion room. Are you likely to need more ports soon? Are 48 ports enough? Maybe a chassis-based switch that's expandable would be a better option.
At the high end you might consider anything from Cisco. Their Catalyst range of switches are the workhorses of many networks. They also come with a matching price tag.
Other options worth considering at the higher end would be Force 10's. Force 10 is known for their 10-gigabit network equipment, but their S Series switches are a powerful play.
Then there's Juniper's EX range. Juniper are known more for their routing platform (I guarantee most of your internet traffic goes through a Juniper router at some point), but their switches are a natural progression.
Coming down the line a little, look at Brocade's FastIron switches. Formerly Foundry Networks (before they got bought out), I" ve used (and continue to use) their switches in my network. If all those are above your price bracket then HP ProCurve switches are worth a look.
All of the above still may do more than you need, though. If all you really, really want is link aggregation and don't care about the rest then I'd probably go for a NetGear over the other lower-end players such as D-Link or LinkSys (even though LinkSys is now owned by Cisco).

How do you make 2 buttons that have different link in one form?

<form name="form1" method="post" action="">
<input name="cmdBtn" type="submit" id="cmdBtn" value="one">
<input name="cmdBtn" type="submit" id="cmdBtn" value="two">
</form>
i want the link of button "one" to have different link with button "two". How can i do it using jsp?
thanks

i posed this question to the javascript forum but no reply, so i just post it here if in case there are jsp users here who knows the answer to my question. hope u guys understand. thanks
I have 2 jsp files namely page1.jsp and page2.jsp.
page1.jsp
<%@ page contentType="text/html; charset=" language="java" import="java.sql.*" errorPage="" %>
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/JavaScript">
function MM_openBrWindow(theURL,winName,features)
{ //v2.0
window.open(theURL,winName,features);
</script>
</head>
<body>
<form name="form1" method="post" action="">
<p>
<input name="txtValue" type="text" id="txtValue" value="i want this value to be passed when i click the 'open new window' button" size="80">
</p>
<p>
<input type="submit" name="Submit" onMouseDown="MM_openBrWindow('page2.jsp','','scrollbars=Yes,width=500,height=500')" style="TEXT-DECORATION:none" value="Open New Window">
</p>
</form>
</body>
</html>
page2.jsp
<%@ page contentType="text/html; charset=" language="java" import="java.sql.*" errorPage="" %>
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body>
<%
String value = request.getParameter("txtValue");
%>
<form name="form1" method="post" action="">
<p> Value is <%=value%></p>
</form>
</body>
</html>
what the code does is it open a new window (page2.jsp) if you click the button in page1.jsp, my problem is, i can't pass the value of txtValue from page1.jsp to page2.jsp, How can i do it?
thanks

Link aggregation

Hello,
I have a new Mac Pro specifically dedicated as a security camera server and am wondering if I should implement the use of two Ethernet ports and/or link aggregation. Here is the rest of the story...
My Mac Pro 3.06 GHz 12-core Intel Xeon computer corrdinates twelve network megapixel sercurity cameras. The network configuration now that the Mac Pro is simply linked into the only network that everything else in my home is via one main 10/100/1000 switch. This same network also hosts four other wired Macs, two HDMI-Cat6-HDMI channels, and a variety of other wired/wireless items that need Internet access. A brief test shows that my new Mac Pro does the job just fine under this plan. Isn't that what a network switch is supposed to do; juggle multiple data streams without them colliding or interfearing with one another? Regardless, I haven't tried to take any diagnostic readings or done any comparisons. I have further found little information from Apple on the use of two Ethernet ports.
So, any suggestions here? Maybe it would be good to have all of my cameras on one Network with the Mac Pro, since it is the one that coordinates all the video data. However, downstream access to all of that data via the main household Network and the Internet would be resticted. This is unless I can use both Networks at the same time. Like I said, I am finding little information to even start designing a Network with these two Enetrnet ports.
More microchips than sense,
Dr. Z.

Link Aggregation uses a slightly different protocol. It is different enough that the Mac will only commit both its Ethernet ports when the equipment you are connecting to explicitly supports Link Aggregation Protocol. (certain high-end Switches do this, but most consumer equipment does not.)
The Mac can use such an Aggregated link once established, but it does not do load-balancing unless there are multiple virtual connections. If you have only one data stream, it will be routed over one side of the aggregate link and will not benefit from having the other side present unless other connections to other places were using the same aggregate link..
So I think that if you are taking advantage of Gigabit Ethernet, you are doing fine. Link Aggregation is available, but it is really solving a problem you do not have in a way that does not benefit you.
Have you checked the actual speed in Network Utility to make sure you really are connecting at Gigabit speeds?
I some times set these up with manual speed so that they connect quickly at the speed I specify (with flow control) instead of auto-speed.

SGE2010 stacking versus link aggregation

Can someone provide an answer regarding stacking the SGE2010 switches versus link aggregation if greater than 1 Gb connectivity is required between individual switches? Currently have several switches in a stack configuration but would like to increase the bandwidth between some or all of the switches. Does stacking support a link aggregation configuration? If so what ports can be used and how should the link aggregation be configured in conjunction with the stacking?

Hi Jacqueline,
On the SGE2010 - Default stacking ports: 24/GBIC 3, 48/GBIC 4 support stacking, that's two ports.
If you want a LAG between SGE2010, my suggestion, and others may disagree, would be to turn off the default stacking mode and enable standalone mode.
Then create a LAG between the SGE2010 switches.
regards dave

Link Aggregation, revisited again

I did all this research to find out how LACP Link Aggregation actually functions in OS X Server, and found many varying opinions out there (there is precious little in OS X documentation, it says essentially set it up and you are good to go:). It seems there is a disagreement on whether OS X (properly configured with LACP switch) will actually spread out traffic dynamically, or whether it only spreads out traffic when one becomes saturated.
So I did a test, configured en0 and en1 as a link aggregate called Fat Pipe, and both show green (Cisco switch with LACP for those ports). However, no matter how many concurrent read/writes to different servers, I can't confirm that there is any improvement at all, which leads me to believe that 'true' load balancing is not happening.
Also, I have read 2 differing opinions on how the bonded NICs should appear in Network prefs: configured as "Off", or as DHCP with self-assigned 169.x.x.x address.
Anyone with info, would be much appreciated. At this point I'm almost inclined to just give each NIC their own IP, and just manually assign some users to connect with one IP, and some with the other...doesn't seem as efficient as aggregation though.
Thanks

I did all this research to find out how LACP Link Aggregation actually functions in OS X Server, and found many varying opinions out there
There's no disagreement as far as I'm aware
It's a function of link aggregation (which is an IEEE standard) and therefore not subject to the whims of Apple's implementation.
The low-down is that the links are both used and specifically which link is used is based on the MAC address of the source and destination hosts.
Moreover, there is no concept of link saturation or failover when one is full - it's entirely possible for one to to be saturated and all the other links to be completely idle if that's the way the MAC addresses run.
A simplified view of the algorithm makes it easy to understand - for a 2-link trunk using en0 and en1, the system looks at the MAC addresses of the source and destination hosts. If they're both odd it uses en0, if they're both even, it uses en0, if they're different (one is odd and one is even) then it uses en1. Therefore, it's entirely possible that all traffic will use one link if all the MAC addresses are odd (or even).
The upshot is that you will never exceed the single link speed (e.g. 1gbps if using 1gbps links) to any single host on the network, so the transfer rates between two devices will be capped at that. However, if a second host initiates a connection, and if that second host's MAC address causes its traffic to transmit over the other link, the the second host's transfers won't be impacted by the first host's transfer.
I can't confirm that there is any improvement at all, which leads me to believe that 'true' load balancing is not happening.
In the real world, it's unlikely that you'll get a single host pumping 1gbps of traffic into the network, so you only really see the effect when you have multiple hosts all talking at the same time. A reasonable test would be to time simultaneous transfers to/from the server, then pull one of the links and see if things slow down.
Also, I have read 2 differing opinions on how the bonded NICs should appear in Network prefs: configured as "Off", or as DHCP with self-assigned 169.x.x.x address.
The links don't appear at all in any of my servers running with trunks. The only interface I see is the trunk.
If I use ifconfig in the terminal I see the underlying links as 'active', but they don't have any IP address assigned to them.

HP 1910-24g and link aggregation

Hi!
I need to know if two this switches are capable of link aggregation.
I have an esxi server, and i want to configure it for fault tollerance and load balance with nic teaming, connect one nic to every switch, so that if a switch fail the server continue working without interruption.
It's possible to do it or the switches support only link aggregation between ports of the same switch?
Thanks!!

Masterx81,
This is the consumer products forum.
You want the HP Enterprise Business Community for server questions.
I am guessing this is the specific area you require for esxi vmware.
Also here... HP1910 Port Aggregation over 2 or more switches?

Link Aggregation headache

Xserve, 2 x 3 ghz Intel Xeon running OSXS 10.5.6. I have tried twice to link the two ethernet ports. I can get the ethernet ports bonded together no problem. Once I make it active and reboot the server it 'appears' to be working. When a client tries to connect over the network though, one can make the connection and it will close down about a minute later. After that no connection is possible without rebooting the server, for a repeat of the preceding. Restoring the single ethernet only works when the bond is actually deleted from the list of services. Connection is to a Netgear GS748 Switch. Since I have two other SL servers with bonded ethernets connected to the same switch, I think I can safely rule out the switch, leaving just the server as the problem. Is a bonded interface then simply not functional under server 10.5.x?

Camelot wrote:
I have many Leopard servers with bonded interfaces, without any problems, so something else is amiss.
Have you actually configured the switch to bond the two ports, too?
Yes.
Having a switch that supports link aggregation is only half the issue. You need to configure the switch to tell it to bond the two ports that go to the XServe.
Understood. I have 5 pairs of ports on the switch that are bonded and work as intended.
Failing that, what do the logs have to say about it?
I haven't checked the logs yet (should have done so before even posting . . )
Have you tried different cables?
First thing I changed . .
Thanks.
Craig

Etherchannel and link aggregation

Hi!
I'm a bit confused now, Sun Trunking supports Cisco Etherchannel, but link aggregation doesn't (if I understand correctly, a with the results of my quick tests).
Sun Trunking seems to be supporting a certain set of drivers and link aggregation another set.
Right now I've got a T2000 with 4 X e1000g and 4 X nxge, does anyone knows, if I can use these interfaces with Cisco Etherchannel, or do I absolutely need to use LACP with link aggregation??? The problem is that the network guys don't want us to use LACP (for whatever reason they have)...
Thank you very much.
Martin

I don't know any cisco term referring to "pure" etherchannel, so I don't know how to answer that. Both LACP and PAgP are link management protocols that cisco can use. I'm supposing that you're asking if the cards will work with PAgP management, but I'm not sure.
This FAQ:
http://www.sun.com/products/networking/ethernet/suntrunking/faq.xml
suggests that I've been incorrect about 802.3ad being a "new" thing and that SunTrunking 1.3 also uses it.
The SunTrunking 1.3 docs here:
http://docs.sun.com/source/817-3374-11/index.html
in chapter 1 (Overview) list six cards. I don't think yours are any of them, so SunTrunking is out.
Because LACP "only" manages the link configuration rather than driving the data, it seems to me that both the link-aggregation and cisco sides could work without LACP being present, but the management of the links might be wonky.
So without LACP, the links have to be configured manually, but I don't yet see anything that states that the two sides will not communicate if that is done.
Further, the 'dladm' man page says that one valid lacp mode on the Solaris is "off", so it must have some functionality without LACP. I would imagine that will required some sort of manual link configuration on the cisco side. (The solaris side is not going to do PAgP).
See also:
http://www.kabewm.com/2007/02/22/solaris-10-lacp-trunking-w-cisco-6509/
When the www.opensolaris.org boards come back up, I would recommend posting this question in the "networking" discussion group.
Darren

I have configured Link Aggregation on two SF300 Switch

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for