From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 21 14:40:40 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A90D217F; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 14:40:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kob6558@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-x22f.google.com (mail-ob0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22f]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A4BC150; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 14:40:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id xn12so7112586obc.20 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 07:40:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=RMbM7maYRHx2zrnIyfSJc6fK/1FHS73H+dRlP2ZVhkk=; b=DW2XbbyBy6cHJ9d1GZgliNVcgAv5sWes8Z5UayFZwNoQ46ILguaqKGcXeJVV0VVT4B W1doK4d5xFNf/QVYvcpSkZzk87AlRSIe6NLGCthh4GUGqP7DaUFku6Q0XDoP+NFcLoPg KfkLjnHzhILPchYTReISuQ8fgjUHcIEac3jMdGu9zoAADbK4Ly2QAvUCmqmxO6fV2bxF o5CI5KH9IGM3EAVqkbS8/RMJ1wqH/3mn9dx9oCYbNMl412o2PN0eCYRYIK5LAdgGe1yw JtOOfsOrNW+VoNMSdfKVZ7DCJxzVWthzOAWypciHDaxz/xakAMlUYhJJ4splEIh90PvC I0sw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.52.165 with SMTP id u5mr23670422oeo.15.1374417640014; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 07:40:40 -0700 (PDT) Sender: kob6558@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.112.212 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 07:40:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <53315.1374329071.4500971523820617728@ffe15.ukr.net> <1374411800.11157.YahooMailBasic@web121604.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 07:40:39 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: SADtlXrLRg43Tk_JkkJzEBcBSuM Message-ID: Subject: Re: LACP LAGG device problems From: Kevin Oberman To: Adrian Chadd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: Barney Cordoba , isp , freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 14:40:40 -0000 On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 6:49 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Hah! > > I'm pushing 20GE out using lagg right now (and fixing the er, amusing > behaviour of doing so.) I'm aiming to hit 40 once I get hardware that > doesn't get upset pushing that many bits. The netops people at ${JOB} > also point out that even today switches occasionally get confused and > "crash" a switchport. Ew. > > So yes, there are people using lagg, both for failover and throughput > reasons. > > I'm working on debugging/statistics right now as part of general "why > are things behaving crappy" debugging. I'll see about improving some > of the peer reporting at the same time. > > > > -adrian > > On 21 July 2013 06:03, Barney Cordoba wrote: > > > > -------------------------------------------- > > On Sat, 7/20/13, isp wrote: > > > > Subject: LACP LAGG device problems > > To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org > > Date: Saturday, July 20, 2013, 10:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > Hi! Can anybody tell me, is there any plans to improve > > LAGG(802.3ad) > > device driver in FreeBSD? > > It will be greate to have a possibility to set LACP mode > > (active/passive) > > and system priority. > > Also there is no way to set hashing algorithm and master > > interface > > (port). > > And we can't see any information about our neighbor. > > The same function in Linux is named Bonding and it is much > > more better. > > I realy can donate some money to those who can make this > > improvements. > > Best regards. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Why are you using LAGG when 10g cards are like $350? It's not > > a peering protocol nor it is PTP; can you see your "peer" info on > > an ethernet? > > > > Bonding is a late 90s concept designed to connect 2 slow links to > > get higher speeds, back in the day when 100Mb/s was ambitious. > > The point of LAGG is that it's transparent; you can load balance > > traffic to multiple hosts or create a redundant link without having > > to have equipment running some special applications, or any special > > logic above the LAGG device. > > > > Describing how you are using LAGG (and why) might be better > > than just asking for "improvements". > > > > BC > I am aware of at least one case where 100G WAN links are being LAGGed today. Only two ATM, but 4x100G is on the horizon. I suspect 4x100G or even more is already in place in the data center, but I have no actual knowledge. and 100G i still quite a bit more than $320 per port. And that is ignoring the cost of 100G routing, switching, and optical gear. LAGG is not going away any time soon. I'm sure we will see Nx400G as soon as 400G Ethernet is available. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com