Link Aggregation - computer to switch-pair

Hi all,
According to the Mac OS X Server documentation (http://images.apple.com/server/macosx/docs/AdvancedServer_Adminv10.6.pdf, page 165), it is possible to create a "Computer to switch-pair" scenario, to provide a redundant network connection for an Xserve running OS X Server 10.5 or 10.6.
What I would like to set up, is for an Xserve to connect to 2 different switches (using link aggregation as described in the manual), so that if a switch fails, the Xserve retains connectivity (using the same IP address).
Has anyone managed to do this in reality? If so, would you mind telling me how it is configured? Info on how to set this up is non-existent...even a local Apple engineer was unable to help.
If it helps, I'm connecting my Xserves to either: (a) a pair of HP ProCurve 2810-24G switches, or (b) HP ProCurve 8200zl and 5400zl switch
Thanks in advance for any assistance.
Cheers,
Dave.

Link aggregation can give you redundancy and greater bandwidth by allowing you to combine Ethernet ports, but the ports must be connected to the same switch. I don't believe there is a way to connect to two different switches using the same IP as technically that would create a loop, which would bring the connection on your Mac to a halt, if not slow down the entire switch.
Switch failure isn't super-common, at least not in my experience, and you're using good switches to begin with. I would create a link if you need more bandwidth to the switch for, say, a fileserver but otherwise, I wouldn't worry about it.
If you do decide to try link aggregating, you need to do two things:
In OS X under Network Prefs go to > (Gear Icon) Manage Virtual Interfaces > New Link Aggregate... and combine your ports there. In the new Network panel created for the new ethernet bond, enter your TCP/IP settings.
In the switch, you need to enable LACP (Link Aggregation Control Protocol) for each port you want to include in the link aggregation. This is usually just a checkbox in the main ports page of the switch admin interface. Many switches don't support link aggregation, so if you can't find it easily, make sure your switch actually includes it.
JM

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.

Link Aggregation to 2 switches for Failover

I know this subject has been commented on in the past but I'm looking for fresh opinions.
Here is my scenario:
5 intel xserve 10.6.4 with 4 nics (2 onboard 2 PCI)
Our network switches support LACP but only for ports on that switch, we can not split our bonded nics to two switches. (Our switches do not support meshing)
I'm interested in failover more than throughput.
By setting the bondmode to static the failover works but we run the risk of overloading the switch since the MAC address of the bonded nics constantly hops between ports on the switch. (mac-flap)
If I bind 2 interfaces to a switch and 2 to another I now have 2 different IP addresses and although I eliminate the switch as a single point of failure I now have a DNS issue.
Any ideas would be appreciated.

By setting the bondmode to static the failover works but we run the risk of overloading the switch since the MAC address of the bonded nics constantly hops between ports on the switch. (mac-flap)
You really, really don't want to do this. Most switches force a pause (even if only for a few milliseconds) whenever a MAC flaps like this. That will wreak havoc on sustained throughput (e.g. when downloading files, for example). Don't go there.
If I bind 2 interfaces to a switch and 2 to another I now have 2 different IP addresses and although I eliminate the switch as a single point of failure I now have a DNS issue.
There are ways of getting over this, depending on your network topology/routing. One would be to migrate the IP address of the failed interface to the other interface should the link fail - a simple shell script should be able to do this.
Any ideas would be appreciated.
Don't fall into the trap of over-engineering your network. Before you go much further think about the last time your switch failed. Most switches (especially reputable brands) have reliability bordering on rock-solid, so you might be trying to cater for an event that will never happen. In my experience, servers go down far more often than switches do (even if just for regular maintenance) so you might consider how to protect services if/when your server goes down more than when your switch does.

Link aggregation must require switch support lacp ,does it?

Can I　use the policy L4 ?
I use the dladm show-aggr -s -i 4 to test the network bandwidth.and use the iometer to give it stress.
but the result is not very good .the aggr1 bandwidth is the same with a single e1000g card.
root@opensolaris:~# dladm show-aggr
LINK POLICY ADDRPOLICY LACPACTIVITY LACPTIMER FLAGS
aggr1 L4 auto off short -----
root@opensolaris:~# dladm show-aggr -s -i 4
LINK PORT IPACKETS RBYTES OPACKETS OBYTES IPKTDIST OPKTDIST
aggr1 -- 101717260 125773579513 207642925 187141265486 -- --
-- e1000g0 4055 1026873 3335 747493 0.0 0.0
-- e1000g1 101713205 125772552640 207639590 187140517993 100.0 100.0
aggr1 -- 165658 201296250 369180 113417467 -- --
-- e1000g0 0 0 3 590 0.0 0.0
-- e1000g1 165658 201296250 369177 113416877 100.0 100.0
aggr1 -- 161590 186946394 375078 117261414 -- --
-- e1000g0 1 1518 3 502 0.0 0.0
-- e1000g1 161589 186944876 375075 117260912 100.0 100.0
aggr1 -- 111482 125969868 257906 80692494 -- --
-- e1000g0 12 10284 3 502 0.0 0.0
-- e1000g1 111470 125959584 257903 80691992 100.0 100.0

I tried two clients with IOMeter , and change the policy from L4 to L3,L4 .It looks very nice.The read performance is good .
But the write(8k/32 in IOmeter) performance did not increase,the bandwidth still is the same with a single e1000g card . one client is 50 Mb/s the other is only 60Mb/s too. If it run correct it both should be over 90Mb/s .
what's the matter? I would hope that two streams will go faster, though.
root@opensolaris:~# dladm show-aggr
LINK POLICY ADDRPOLICY LACPACTIVITY LACPTIMER FLAGS
aggr1 L3,L4 auto off short -----
root@opensolaris:~# dladm show-aggr -s -i 4
LINK PORT IPACKETS RBYTES OPACKETS OBYTES IPKTDIST OPKTDIST
aggr1 -- 178311 211224084 421066 481581366 -- --
-- e1000g0 148504 174342924 323589 461207855 83.3 76.8
-- e1000g1 29807 36881160 97477 20373511 16.7 23.2
aggr1 -- 152755 180057562 331059 370303397 -- --
-- e1000g0 113624 128032580 249968 353636849 74.4 75.5
-- e1000g1 39131 52024982 81091 16666548 25.6 24.5

Link Aggregation: LGS318P Switch and LRT214 Router

The manual for my LGS318P is a little confusing (perhaps because I'm relatively new at more advanced features of networking).
I have an LRT214 router that I'm now routing all traffic through my LGS318P in the basement. From there it goes to multiple locations in the house, WAP's, etc. Currently, port 17 of the LGS318P connects to LAN1 of my LRT214 router. LAN2-4 are unused.
I would like to create a link aggregation for ports 17 and 18 to LAN1 and LAN2 of my router for both redundancy as well as possible speed improvement.
What is the best way to do this? Do I simply edit LAG1, place GE17 and GE18 as LAG port members, and select LACP to enable? Will that automatically set things up?
I don't want to do this then lose connectivity to my switch to reverse things.
Also, how many ports can be aggregated? Can I use 4 ports on the switch to the 4 LAN ports on the router?
What about the flow control option? Should that be disabled (default setting), enabled, or auto?
Thanks for all the help anyone can provide!

I also found something from the Linksys website for your consumption. I provides additional information about the rules of setting up LAC. The link is located at:
http://kb.linksys.com/Linksys/ukp.aspx?vw=1&docid=986c6706bc7649b686850c5a26855a8f_15746.xml&pid=80&...
I hope it helps.

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).

Link aggregated between NAS and a switch: the Mac as a very slow access...

Hello,
in my Office we're working with Macs and PCs and all the data is on a NAS.
Here is our configuration:
NAS <-link1->Switch<-Link2->Macs or PC.
Macs are connected with AFP protocol (because SMB is very slow).
We want to use Link Aggregation between the NAS and the switch (with 802.3ad procotol) but when we do that all the Macs have a very slow access to the NAS. But all is OK with the PCs.
What can we do? Is there a problem with macOS X and link aggregation?
Thank you for your help.
Nicolas

Sorry, not sure what the question is exactly.
You must have an Xserve, or Ethernet cards capable of Jumbo Frames for one, I assume the Switch & NAS are capable?
Possible clues...
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?path=ServerAdmin/10.4/en/c3ha3.html
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1715388&tstart=0
http://www.macnn.com/articles/04/06/21/link.aggregation.for.macs/
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/30556/53/
http://www.afp548.com/forum/viewtopic.php?showtopic=8309

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

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.

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

Assistance needed with SG300-10 and QNAP TS-459 Pro II Link Aggregation

All,
As the subject specifies, I have a pair of devices on a local network that I would like to play nicely together.
My problem:
If the TS-459 is configured for standalone (No Link Aggregation), then I can access the NAS via Ping, web interface, NFS, etc.. however, If I try enabling Link Aggregation, then I lose TCP/IP connectivity to it and must use QNAP's Finder utility to change Link Aggregation mode back to Standalone.
What I'm asking is - has anyone here configured a QNAP NAS appliance with Link Aggregation enabled with an SG300 or similar?? If so, could you kindly provide a walk-through on the appropriate settings for each?
My first attempts on the NAS side were to choose the "Balance-alb" (automatic load balance) and "Balance-tlb" (adaptive transmit load balance) - The QNAP_Turbo_NAS_User_manual_V3.4_ENG.pdf states that these two modes are for "General Switches", so I assumed they should work.. unfortunately, no luck for me..
Next up, I tried the IEEE 802.3ad / Link Aggregation setting on the NAS, while the device was rebooting, I configured the two GB ports on the SG300 to be a LAG with LACP enabled. Unfortunately, this too did not work as I had hoped.
I called QNAP support and of course they don't have an Sg300-10 to test with, but will test their TS-459 Pro II to confirm the Link Aggregation settings function as advertised. I hope to hear back from them later this evening. In the meantime, if anyone here has insight, it would be very much appreciated. The NAS and SG300 are for a home lab consisting of a pair of Dual-six core systems with 48GB of mem each for vSphere.
NAS Details:
Model: QNAP TS-459 Pro II
Firmware: 3.4.4 (0718T)
Drives: Seagate 2TB x4
Switch Details:
Model: Cisco SG300-10
Firmware version active image: 1.1.0.73
Thank you,
Burke

Hi Burke,
You can use link-aggregation 802.3AD with the sg-300. Try to make the trunk in the sg-300 with LACP enabled (before you make the trunk, otherwise LACP is disabled and you will only be able to do so by deleting the trunk and add it again). Flow control is enabled in the sg-300 (altough i'm not sure if this is needed). I've got the sg-300 and the QNAP TS 439 pro II+.

How can I set a right link Aggregations?

I have a Enterprise T5220 server, running Solaris 10 that I am using as a backup server. On this server, I have a Layer 4, LACP-enabled link aggregation set up using two of the server's Gigabit NICs (e1000g2 and e1000g3) and until recently I was getting up to and sometimes over 1.5 Gb/s as desired. However, something has happened recently to where I can now barely get over 1 Gb/s. As far as I know, no patches were applied to the server and no changes were made to the switch that it's connected to (Nortel Passport 8600 Series) and the total amount of backup data sent to the server has stayed fairly constant. I have tried setting up the aggregation multiple times and in multiple ways to no avail. (LACP enabled/disabled, different policies, etc.) I've also tried using different ports on the server and switch to rule out any faulty port problems. Our networking guys assure me that the aggregation is set up correctly on the switch side but I can get more details if needed.
In order to attempt to better troubleshoot the problem, I run one of several network speed tools (nttcp, nepim, & iperf) as the "server" on the T5220, and I set up a spare X2100 as a "client". Both the server and client are connected to the same switch. The first set of tests with all three tools yields roughly 600 Mb/s. This seems a bit low to me, I seem to remember getting 700+ Mb/s prior to this "issue". When I run a second set of tests from two separate "client" X2100 servers, coming in on two different Gig ports on the T5220, each port also does ~600 Mb/s. I have also tried using crossover cables and I only get maybe a 50-75 Mb/s increase. After Googling Solaris network optimizations, I found that if I double tcp_max_buf to 2097152, and set tcp_xmit_hiwat & tcp_recv_hiwat to 524288, it bumps up the speed of a single Gig port to ~920 Mb/s. That's more like it!
Unfortunately however, even with the TCP tweaks enabled, I still only get a little over 1 Gb/s through the two aggregated Gig ports. It seems as though the aggregation is only using one port, though MRTG graphs of the two switch ports do in fact show that they are both being utilized equally, essentially splitting the 1 Gb/s speed between
the two ports.
Problem with the server? switch? Aggregation software? All the above? At any rate, I seem to be missing something.. Any help regarding this issue would be greatly appreciated!
Regards,
sundy
Output of several commands on the T5220:
uname -a:
SunOS oitbus1 5.10 Generic_137111-07 sun4v sparc SUNW,SPARC-Enterprise-T5220
ifconfig -a (IP and broadcast hidden for security):
lo0: flags=2001000849 mtu 8232 index 1
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000
aggr1: flags=1000843 mtu 1500 index 2
inet x.x.x.x netmask ffffff00 broadcast x.x.x.x
ether 0:14:4f:ec:bc:1e
dladm show-dev:
e1000g0 link: unknown speed: 0 Mbps duplex: half
e1000g1 link: unknown speed: 0 Mbps duplex: half
e1000g2 link: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full
e1000g3 link: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full
dladm show-link:
e1000g0 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g0
e1000g1 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g1
e1000g2 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g2
e1000g3 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g3
aggr1 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 aggregation: key 1
dladm show-aggr:
key: 1 (0x0001) policy: L4 address: 0:14:4f:ec:bc:1e (auto) device address speed
duplex link state
e1000g2 0:14:4f:ec:bc:1e 1000 Mbps full up attached
e1000g3 1000 Mbps full up attached
dladm show-aggr -L:
key: 1 (0x0001) policy: L4 address: 0:14:4f:ec:bc:1e (auto) LACP mode: active LACP timer: short
device activity timeout aggregatable sync coll dist defaulted expired
e1000g2 active short yes yes yes yes no no
e1000g3 active short yes yes yes yes no no
dladm show-aggr -s:
key: 1 ipackets rbytes opackets obytes %ipkts %opkts
Total 464982722061215050501612388529872161440848661
e1000g2 30677028844072327428231142100939796617960694 66.0 59.5
e1000g3 15821243372049177622000967520476 64822888149 34.0 40.5

sundy.liu wrote:
Unfortunately however, even with the TCP tweaks enabled, I still only get a little over 1 Gb/s through the two aggregated Gig ports. It seems as though the aggregation is only using one port, though MRTG graphs of the two switch ports do in fact show that they are both being utilized equally, essentially splitting the 1 Gb/s speed between
the two ports.
Problem with the server? switch? Aggregation software? All the above? At any rate, I seem to be missing something.. Any help regarding this issue would be greatly appreciated!If you're only running a single stream, that's all you'll see. Teaming/aggregating doesn't make one stream go faster.
If you ran two streams simultaneously, then you should see a difference between a single 1G interface and an aggregate of two 1G interfaces.
Darren

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

Mac Mini Server Link aggregation - Thunderbolt or USB 3 gigabit ethernet adaptors

I am setting up a late 2012 Mac Mini as a file server with Server 2.2. It has a Promise Pegasus R4 RAID and LaCie 4TB drives daisy chained via the Thunderbolt connection. 4 users on MacPro's will connect to the server to access these hard drives via gigabit ethernet.
I imagine the gigabit ethernet will be the bottleneck, so I'm now looking at link aggregation. Not a problem on the MacPro's but the Mac Mini will require an adaptor to get a second gigabit port. From reading this forum I understand the Apple Thunderbolt to Gigabit adaptor will work, but I'm concerned that it will need to be fitted 3rd in line after the R4 and LaCie drives. The 10Gbps bandwidth Thunderbolt has, may cause another bottleneck with all three working off the same port?
An option would be to use one of the USB 3 ports with this adaptor http://www.ebuyer.com/412005-startec...edium=products
I believe it work with OSX, but I have no speed information or if OSX link aggregation will work using it.
Any thoughts on the above would be appreciated and recommendations on a suitable Network Switch with LACP support welcome.

At present Mountain Lion Server cannot use a LACP bond, in my experience only of course. http://www.small-tree.com/kb_results.asp?ID=59 describes LACP/Bonds do not show up in Server Admin GUI on Mountain Lion
anyone know how to do it? or the location and the name of the plist file to configure the network interface in ML server?
regards

Cant get link aggregation working on srw2048

Hello
We are trying to setup link aggregation between 2 nodes in our cluster. They are 64 bit nodes running Opensuse 11.1 and are connected by Gigabit Ethernet. We have an srw2048 switch.
The problem is we are not able to see any performance improvement in network bandwidth after the configuration. We seem to have configured the nodes correctly: ifconfig shows something like this on both nodes, where eth4, eth5 are slaves to bond0 :
bond0     Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1E:68:78:F9:84            inet addr:192.168.1.198 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0           inet6 addr: fe80::21e:68ff:fe78:f984/64 Scope:Link           UP BROADCAST RUNNING MASTER MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1           RX packets:40443248 errors:442 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:442           TX packets:30955485 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0           collisions:0 txqueuelen:0            RX bytes:31836352423 (30361.5 Mb) TX bytes:31997996320 (30515.6 Mb)
eth4      Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1E:68:78:F9:84            UP BROADCAST RUNNING SLAVE MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1           RX packets:6213 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0           TX packets:15477741 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0           collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000            RX bytes:1290977 (1.2 Mb) TX bytes:16000747443 (15259.5 Mb)           Interrupt:246 Base address:0xe000   eth5      Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1E:68:78:F9:84            UP BROADCAST RUNNING SLAVE MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1           RX packets:40437035 errors:442 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:442           TX packets:15477744 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0           collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000            RX bytes:31835061446 (30360.2 Mb) TX bytes:15997248877 (15256.1 Mb)           Interrupt:247 Base address:0x4000
Starting the network services shows
bond0          bond0     enslaved interface: eth5     bond0     enslaved interface: eth4     bond0     (DHCP) . . IP/Netmask: '192.168.1.198' / '255.255.255.0'
So it seems that the client side configuration is correct. The bond has been configured with the default mode balance-rr.
On the switch side, we have grouped the right ports to form LAG groups and have checked LACP on them. Running some trusted TCP benchmarks yields the same results as the original configuration without link aggregation.
I feel we are missing some configuration on the switch side.
Can anybody point out what we are doing wrong?
Thanks,
K**bleep**ij

If you think this has been a mis-configuration on the switch side, please try to reset the switch and then re-configure it again. You may also seek assistance with a Cisco/Linksys tech support so that they can guide you step by step at real time.

Link Aggregation - computer to switch-pair

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for