From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 15 21:31:59 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B2416A4CE for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:31:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACCFD43D1D for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:31:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2865B129380 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:31:56 -0400 (AST) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30944-04 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:31:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ganymede.hub.org (blk-222-46-186.eastlink.ca [24.222.46.186]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BC0B1291F2 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:31:55 -0400 (AST) Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7CFAD614FA; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:31:57 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798C4614D7 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:31:57 -0400 (AST) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:31:57 -0400 (AST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20050315172937.V92893@ganymede.hub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org Subject: use of ng_fec ... X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:32:00 -0000 After reading up on the Cisco stuff that ng_fec is meant for, I'm curious as to whether there is a way of determining if its needed ... in my case, I have one server, two ethernets but all attaching to the same switch ... is there some way of determining if the interface(s) (on either hte FreeBSD box, or the Cisco switch) is "overly busy", that load balancing would be beneficial? Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664