From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 29 10:18:02 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B05106564A; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:18:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de) Received: from host.omnilan.net (s1.omnilan.net [62.245.232.135]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 536B68FC0A; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:18:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from titan.inop.wdn.omnilan.net (titan.inop.wdn.omnilan.net [172.21.3.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by host.omnilan.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q7TAIW0v046920 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Aug 2012 12:18:32 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from h.schmalzbauer@omnilan.de) Message-ID: <503DEC58.1050609@omnilan.de> Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 12:18:00 +0200 From: Harald Schmalzbauer Organization: OmniLAN User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; de-DE; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100906 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pete French References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigB2100205CAE4CC6704DAFA3F" Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, auryn@zirakzigil.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problem with link aggregation + sshd X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:18:03 -0000 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--