Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 12:18:00 +0200 From: Harald Schmalzbauer <h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de> To: Pete French <petefrench@ingresso.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, auryn@zirakzigil.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problem with link aggregation + sshd Message-ID: <503DEC58.1050609@omnilan.de> In-Reply-To: <E1T6eiz-000FgC-TV@dilbert.ingresso.co.uk> References: <E1T6eiz-000FgC-TV@dilbert.ingresso.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigB2100205CAE4CC6704DAFA3F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable schrieb Pete French am 29.08.2012 11:38 (localtime): >> Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and >> static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is >> impossible for two separate switches. > These switches had a port where you could connect them together and > then configure each to know about the other switch, and to do LACP > across the pair of them. Or at least thats what it looked like it > was capable of doing, and it appeared to be doing LACP when configured > that way and connected to Windows machines, just not FreeBSD ones. But = I'm What you desciribe is well known as =E2=80=9Estacking=E2=80=9C (not to mi= x with =E2=80=9Evirtual stacking=E2=80=9C) and sorry that I haven't made clear that in such a cas= e LACP (also static trunking of course) works well and is a fantastic way to gain redundancy. When you create a physical switch stack, the individual switches are no separate switches anymore, but act like one big switch. With the advantage, that in case of a failure, and a trunk configured over two different units of the stack, the link remains active. But like mentioned, these switches are then not considered to be separate (=E2=80=9Evirtual stacking=E2=80=9C only combine them in managem= ent regards, _not_ physically, so be carefull when you look for switches with =E2=80=9Estacking=E2=80=9C capabilities!). The disadvantage of the real hardware stackable switch is the price. The cheapest way I've found is two DGS-3120 (~700$ each plus 200$ stacking cable). Ciscos and Junipers and the bigger HPs are all much above afaik. -Harry --------------enigB2100205CAE4CC6704DAFA3F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlA97FgACgkQLDqVQ9VXb8gG1wCgqn3xBuUpgGMdH2p3Zyx3ALWJ UG4Ani2Uxayyzbu4NHRo+NXWEujmT22G =4o6x -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigB2100205CAE4CC6704DAFA3F--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?503DEC58.1050609>