Link Aggregation with QSFP links on 5672UP

Hi Everyone,
I have a question on my mind for quite some time regarding QSFP aggregation on Nexus 5672UP switch hoping gurus here could shield some light.
According to the data sheet, 5672UP supports 6 true QSFP. I am in a situation where a server require 2xQSFP(40Gbps) links to be bundled together. I wonder with QSFP, can I treat it as normal SFP+ interfaces and aggregate two QSFP links together using vPC to get 80Gbps? If it is possible, it absolutely offers better bandwidth and redundancy.
Thanks,

Hi,
Yes, you can aggregate the 2 QSFPs together in a Portchannel. Just remember if the server has 10Gig SFP+ interfaces, you need a special cable with one side with multiple SFP+ interfaces (4) and the other side 40Gig with MTP interface.
If the server has 40Gig interface than you can go straight from the switch to the server.
HTH

Similar Messages

Link Aggregation with LACP off

Hi,
How does Link Aggregation in Solaris 10 works in the switch if LACP is off?
If it's flip-flopping between two ports in the switch. Who's responsible to update the arp table in the switch?
Thanks

I haven't tried it with a Cisco but you don't have any other/old network/interface settings left on the OS X server when trying LACP do you?
There should only be the bond0 "interface" (with IP, netmask and so on) when trying LACP.

Link Aggregation with LRT214/224

Is it possible to use link aggregation (LAG) with 2 or more ports on the LRT214/224? I'm trying to prepare for Comcast's 2 Gbps ethernet service and wanted to create a LAG with my 224. Thanks!

Hi @ericnix, I believe you don't have that option on the Linksys LRT214/LRT224. It is only capable of providing upto 1000 MBPS LAN speed.

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

Link Aggregation dladm on T2000 with 2 e1000g. How can i change mtu size

Hello
I made a Link Aggregation on a T2000 with e1000g1 & e1000g2 successfully.
Now i want to raise up the mtu size to mtu 9000 for the aggregation.
I tried /etc/hostname.aggr
mtu 9000
unsuccessfully- MTU size still 1500
/kernel/drv/etc/e1000g.conf
setting Max Fram Size for 1 2 3 interface to 2(upto 8k)
also not successfully
MaxFrameSize=0,2,2,2;
# 0 is for normal ethernet frames.
# 1 is for upto 4k size frames.
# 2 is for upto 8k size frames.
# 3 is for upto 16k size frames.
# These are maximum frame limits, not the actual ethernet frame
# size. Your actual ethernet frame size would be determined by
# protocol stack configuration (please refer to ndd command man pages)
# For Jumbo Frame Support (9k ethernet packet)
# use 3 (upto 16k size frames)
Has someone an idea?
thanx for advice

Bug is described:
http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-1-6326664-1
Solution is
T-Patch 125020-01
Message was edited by:
sunibk

Using Link Aggregation and VLAN tagging with LDOMs

Hi,
Anyone know if Link aggregation combined with VLAN tagging works for LDOMs?
Any links or references would be appreciated.....
It would be very handy if each LDOM could have multiple interfaces on different VLANs....
Regards,
Daniel

I agree with bzptlx. While you can have vswitch plumbed without net-dev, and then route traffic inside the control domain, so that you can utilize aggregation, it adds complexity, and in some environments it's just impossible.
I would say that this is number 1 deficiency with LDOM's in general.

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

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

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.

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.

Dual wireless/ Load Balancing/ Link Aggregation

Hi all,
I've been reading up on this topic all day, with multiple Google and Apple searches, but haven't found the exact answer to this query. There was another post on this forum http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1660762 which was vaguely similar.
Basically I'm looking to experiment with combining 2 wireless connections, and therefore 2 seperate internet connections into one Mac.
I have seen suggestions of using a couple of wireless -> ethernet bridges, since Leopard supports Link Aggregation of ethernet devices. But the first question I have is: since I use a 3rd party wireless adaptor (Netgear wg111v3 USB dongle), it already shows up in Network Preferences as an Ethernet port. Leopard treats it as an actual ethernet device, hence is oblivious to the fact it is a wireless adaptor. Since Leopard thinks it's an ethernet port, could I use a second wireless dongle and then use Link Aggregation on them both?
Additionally, if that idea were to work, would it then be possible to connect each wireless adaptor to a seperate wireless network, or would they both have to connect to the same access point?
My DSL connection is roughly 512k on a good day, but I find this bandwidth to be choked when someone else at home is streaming videos etc. So in principle my idea was to have one connection using the regular DSL line as usual, plus connect the secondary wireless to my friend's wireless over the road when needed (and yes he's already agreed to my use since he rarely accesses the net). Therefore, giving a total theoretical bandwidth of 512k x2.
Since I aim for a load-balancing idea (spreading traffic over both connections), the main issue I can forsee is that this Mac will have problems routing traffic with both IPs since I read somewhere else that DNS problems might occur.It seems relatively easy to use Terminal to add a default route for specific destinations (e.g. all traffic to apple.com out of one interface, all traffic to yahoo.com out the other). However, I wondered if web traffic could be forwarded out one connection, whilst email traffic goes through the other. Alternatively, it would be great if web traffic could be "halved" and sent out both wireless connections simultaneously, though I don't think there's an easy way to do this (it would just be a nice feature if possible).
Your thoughts and advice on the matter would be much appreciated, and I'm going to continue experimenting with various ideas and see what I come up with.

Hi all,
I've been reading up on this topic all day, with multiple Google and Apple searches, but haven't found the exact answer to this query. There was another post on this forum http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1660762 which was vaguely similar.
Basically I'm looking to experiment with combining 2 wireless connections, and therefore 2 seperate internet connections into one Mac.
I have seen suggestions of using a couple of wireless -> ethernet bridges, since Leopard supports Link Aggregation of ethernet devices. But the first question I have is: since I use a 3rd party wireless adaptor (Netgear wg111v3 USB dongle), it already shows up in Network Preferences as an Ethernet port. Leopard treats it as an actual ethernet device, hence is oblivious to the fact it is a wireless adaptor. Since Leopard thinks it's an ethernet port, could I use a second wireless dongle and then use Link Aggregation on them both?
Additionally, if that idea were to work, would it then be possible to connect each wireless adaptor to a seperate wireless network, or would they both have to connect to the same access point?
My DSL connection is roughly 512k on a good day, but I find this bandwidth to be choked when someone else at home is streaming videos etc. So in principle my idea was to have one connection using the regular DSL line as usual, plus connect the secondary wireless to my friend's wireless over the road when needed (and yes he's already agreed to my use since he rarely accesses the net). Therefore, giving a total theoretical bandwidth of 512k x2.
Since I aim for a load-balancing idea (spreading traffic over both connections), the main issue I can forsee is that this Mac will have problems routing traffic with both IPs since I read somewhere else that DNS problems might occur.It seems relatively easy to use Terminal to add a default route for specific destinations (e.g. all traffic to apple.com out of one interface, all traffic to yahoo.com out the other). However, I wondered if web traffic could be forwarded out one connection, whilst email traffic goes through the other. Alternatively, it would be great if web traffic could be "halved" and sent out both wireless connections simultaneously, though I don't think there's an easy way to do this (it would just be a nice feature if possible).
Your thoughts and advice on the matter would be much appreciated, and I'm going to continue experimenting with various ideas and see what I come up with.

Link Aggregation ... almost there!

Hi all
After struggling with Link Aggregation on Mac OS X Server to Extreme X450 switches we are almost there. We've now managed to get a live working link where the Ethernet 1 and 2 arew green and the Bond0 shows both links as active, and finally the Bond0 interface picks up a DHCP address.
So that's great, but no Network connection which is weird because it got an IP address.
Do we have to route the traffic over one of the other interfaces or something?
Any suggestions at all?
Cheers
C

Camelot wrote:
The first, or at least - most obvious, problem is that you have IP addresses assigned to each of en0 and en1.
This should not be the case. Only the bond0 network should have an IP address assigned.
The other interfaces should not be configured at all. That's almost certainly the issue since your machine has three IP addresses in the same subnet - one on each of en0, en1 and bond0. It's no wonder things are confused
Thanks that now works a treat!
Was hoping you could help on another set of ports again being configured for Link Aggregation. We have tried to set it up in exactly the same way but again its not working. The ifconfig returns back the following:
lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 16384
inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
gif0: flags=8010<POINTOPOINT,MULTICAST> mtu 1280
stf0: flags=0 mtu 1280
en0: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet6 fe80::219:e3ff:fee7:5706%en0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4
inet 169.254.102.66 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 169.254.255.255
ether 00:19:e3:e7:57:07
media: autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex,flow-control>) status: active
supported media: autoselect 10baseT/UTP <half-duplex> 10baseT/UTP <full-duplex> 10baseT/UTP <full-duplex,hw-loopback> 10baseT/UTP <full-duplex,flow-control> 100baseTX <half-duplex> 100baseTX <full-duplex> 100baseTX <full-duplex,hw-loopback> 100baseTX <full-duplex,flow-control> 1000baseT <full-duplex> 1000baseT <full-duplex,hw-loopback> 1000baseT <full-duplex,flow-control>
en1: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet6 fe80::219:e3ff:fee7:5707%en1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
inet 169.254.102.66 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 169.254.255.255
ether 00:19:e3:e7:57:07
media: autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex,flow-control>) status: active
supported media: autoselect 10baseT/UTP <half-duplex> 10baseT/UTP <full-duplex> 10baseT/UTP <full-duplex,hw-loopback> 10baseT/UTP <full-duplex,flow-control> 100baseTX <half-duplex> 100baseTX <full-duplex> 100baseTX <full-duplex,hw-loopback> 100baseTX <full-duplex,flow-control> 1000baseT <full-duplex> 1000baseT <full-duplex,hw-loopback> 1000baseT <full-duplex,flow-control>
fw0: flags=8822<BROADCAST,SMART,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 2030
lladdr 00:1b:63:ff:fe:6e:6c:8a
media: autoselect <full-duplex> status: inactive
supported media: autoselect <full-duplex>
bond0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
ether 00:19:e3:e7:57:07
media: autoselect status: inactive
supported media: autoselect
bond interfaces: en1 en0
When I compared this to the working Link Aggregation ifconfig output I noticed this one has the line "media: autoselect status: inactive" as appose to active. Could this be the cause and how do I rectify it?
Thanks

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 Aggregation and OS X Server

Hello.
I'm moving my servers (3 x Intel Xserves running 10.5.6) to a new location with all new network hardware (wiring, switches, routers, etc.) and I'm now considering using link aggregation on the Xserves (the previous switches didn't support it while the new ones do) — but, since I'm working with servers which are already set up I'm concerned I might "break" services by moving to link aggregation. I've concerned that services which are bound to a specific network connection/port will fail when setting up link aggregation (for example, an Open Directory setup as OD Master).
Does anyone have any experience with this? I've read that with OD you have to revert back to an Standalone setup before setting up link aggregation, but I've only seen this mentioned once on other forums (and have never seen it confirmed anywhere).
Anyway, if anyone has any experience/advice/etc. it'd be much appreciated!
Regards,
Kristin.

To add to that question, do I just have to set the link aggregation in the Network interfaces preferences of the X-Serves or do we also have to set the Switches (through their administration interfaces) to be prepared for link-aggregation?

Link Aggregation with QSFP links on 5672UP

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for