Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 01:37:12 +0200 From: Dean Strik <dean@stack.nl> To: Shaun Jurrens <shaun.jurrens@skoleetaten.oslo.no> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ng_fec and vlans Message-ID: <20030819233712.GE779@dragon.stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <20030819174358.GN71232@nevada.skoleetaten.oslo.no> References: <20030819174358.GN71232@nevada.skoleetaten.oslo.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Shaun Jurrens wrote: > I have two dell 1750's connected to a c3750 switch. FEC works with ip > addresses attached to the fec0 interfaces (although, single connections seem > to remain on one link or the other, I haven't played with the load-balancing > on the switch yet for the channel group, might be my fault). Not sure what you mean by single connection. If you mean an application connection, e.g. a file transfer, then yes, it will always remain on the same link. With FEC, the physical link used is determined by srcip XOR dstip or srcmac XOR dstmac Since these do not change during a session, the session will always go over one link. > My questions are: > > 1) Is is even possible to successfully "attach" vlan devices to netgraph > nodes, specifically the ng_fec node (I can't decipher enough of netgraph to > begin with to make a guess, just a copy monkey here...), i.e. have interface > fec the parent device? This is not possible, unfortunately. > 2) Is the correct way on the Cisco side to configure interfaces in the FEC > group as trunks, _or_ group them as access ports, and make the FEC group a > trunk? (I haven't read exhaustively on this, seems to be some descrepency > between CatOS and IOS on this anyway...) No idea, sorry. -- Dean C. Strik Eindhoven University of Technology dean@stack.nl | dean@ipnet6.org | http://www.ipnet6.org/ "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." -- Wolfgang Pauli
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030819233712.GE779>