From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 8 23:51:47 2004 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 0431016A4CE for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:51:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mizar.origin-it.net (mizar.origin-it.net [194.8.96.234]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC5C43D2F for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:51:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from helge.oldach@atosorigin.com) Received: from matar.hbg.de.int.atosorigin.com (dehsfw3e.origin-it.net [194.8.96.68])i297p35g063427 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:51:03 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from helge.oldach@atosorigin.com) Received: from galaxy.hbg.de.ao-srv.com (galaxy.hbg.de.ao-srv.com [161.89.20.4])ESMTP id i297p3bC051369; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:51:03 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from helge.oldach@atosorigin.com) Received: (from hmo@localhost) by galaxy.hbg.de.ao-srv.com (8.9.3p2/8.9.3/hmo30mar03) id IAA21292; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:50:58 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200403090750.IAA21292@galaxy.hbg.de.ao-srv.com> In-Reply-To: <200403081553.58502.jbarrett@amduat.net> from "Jacob S. Barrett" at "Mar 9, 2004 0:53:58 am" To: jbarrett@amduat.net (Jacob S. Barrett) Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 08:50:58 +0100 (MET) From: Helge Oldach X-Address: Atos Origin GmbH, Friesenstraße 13, D-20097 Hamburg, Germany X-Phone: +49 40 7886 7464, Fax: +49 40 7886 9464, Mobile: +49 160 4782517 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: julian@elischer.org Subject: Re: Solution for Resilient VLAN Trunk Bonding 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, 09 Mar 2004 07:51:47 -0000 Jacob S. Barrett: >I have some questions about the ng_fec. Would it work if each interface >was connected to a different switch? I'd say this isn't an issue with ng_fec, but rather an architectural point regarding EtherChannel as such. I am not aware of any switch vendor that offers multi-chassis EtherChannel. In fact many even require that the physical links terminate on the same switch blade and don't permit distribution over multiple blades in the same chassis. >Everything I have read on the list says that they done it only with >having "trunking" enabled on the switch as well. That is definitely the case. Both ends must be aware that they belong to a channel, and if you want decent resiliency they should also talk the appropriate channeling protocol. Usually LACP (802.3ad); in the Cisco case PAgP might suit you better. Neither is supported by ng_fec, AFAIK. Be aware that the term "trunking" is commonly used for grouping multiple VLANs onto one link (802.1q) in the switching world. Helge