Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 16:24:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "Brian A. Seklecki" <lavalamp@spiritual-machines.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dell PowerEdge w/ Intel AFT / Broadcom BASP Message-ID: <20051006161245.I95280@arbitor.digitalfreaks.org> In-Reply-To: <20051005130209.K95280@arbitor.digitalfreaks.org> References: <20051005130209.K95280@arbitor.digitalfreaks.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
For the record on this, Dell claims that AFT/ALB is entirely software based. On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Brian A. Seklecki wrote: > All: > > This may be better for freebsd-cluster@freebsd.org, but that list is kind of > ghost town, and this question is more a standards-based: > > Does anyone deploy Dell Poweredge in a HA configuration utilizing these > features? > > http://www.intel.com/network/connectivity/resources/technologies/load_balancing.htm > http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/power/en/ps1q03_bhutani?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz > http://www.broadcom.com/drivers/faq_drivers.php#55 > > Do we know what underlying standards and protocols compose these > "technologies"? 802.3ad, Cisco FEC? > > Intel AFT claims to provide redundancy over a "team" of NICs. ALB claims > link aggregation; but they don't specify if they're doing it in hardware or > sofware (see Below) > > Broadcom BASP claims the same, given different terminology and vendor. > > I'm looking for a "fault tolerant" configuration for a HA cluster. "Load > balancing" and/or "link aggregation" is not required. I need to be able to > "team" two NICs into one Virtual NIC. Each NIC connects to two redundant > managed switches, on which the connecting switch ports exist in the same VLAN > (which is then ISL/802.1q trunked between them). Essentially > the same ethernet segment. > > I see ng_one2many(4), but the man page doesn't really state what standard > that uses. It seems to be all in-kernel magic (LACP and 802.3.ad aren't > mentioned in the man page); will this meet the above requirements? > > There were some ng_one2many(4) patches a while back to add more intellegence, > (FEC/802.3ad heartbeat like control protocol) > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=107695977400002&r=1&w=2 > ...but no mention of them ever being commited. > > I see ng_fec(4) also, but I don't think that Cisco Ethernet Channel can occur > between two switches and one server (correct me if I'm wrong). > > I question the Hardware v.s. Software issue on the Intel NICs becase the Dell > PowerEdges Severs that happen to have Intel NIC Chipsets using em(4) (many > have Broadcom), seem to automatically try to "team" NICs when they're > connected to unmanaged PowerConnect switches, breaking ng_one2many logic. > They constantly alternate MAC addresses between the primary ethernet, the > secondary ethernet, and a 3rd 1-byte-off Virtual MAC. > > This automatic attempt to team seems like a hardware feature. If it was a > software feature, in theory it wouldn't try to team w/o being instructed to? > > On the other hand, *managed* Dell PowerConnect switches feature something > called "LAG", which the docs describe as 802.3ad / LACP. > > I haven't tried ng_one2many on non-Dell or Dell Managed switches to see if > the MAC address "bouncing" problem persists, but I'll try that today. > > So the big question: > > *) Is the Windows/Linux-only software for configuring "teams" of NICs, > described in the URLs below, designed to configure a hardware level > feature that might have more intellegent link failure detection than > ng_many2one? (I.e., other than just lost carrier, say, STP storm > detection or excessive packet error thresholds). Or is it software? > > *) If it is a hardware feature, could our em(4) driver be adapted or > could it possibly be configured using OpenManage via the Intel > IPMI/DMI/SMI whatever? > > *) Can Cisco FEC or 802.3ad provide reundancy between two switches and > one server w/ two NICs? Will NetGraph ever have a 802.3ad module? > > *) What combination of Switch and NIC related teaming / failover technology > are known to be compatible with FreeBSD ? > > TIA, > ~BAS > l8* -lava x.25 - minix - bitnet - plan9 - 110 bps - ASR 33 - base8
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051006161245.I95280>