From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Sep 22 19:14:00 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C759BBE5FC3 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 19:14:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from mail-wm0-x22f.google.com (mail-wm0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59894EF1 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 19:14:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: by mail-wm0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id b130so165632184wmc.0 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:14:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=multiplay-co-uk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=3JLQBcPJYVX5m1uC/n9XYtV3PlLftbWAiJaHTcSV8dQ=; b=cR5+3LihHStjwmi/C2BsJpc8EPJr62lZZpDzEk4XdUDfFnYpqpdlyRicA92piQHY3D NYOYhVA2ROl1zswxx5xz2J9eVZgC33eVC3a2iA/w49JyA+I62BTGgwFe7nhDVW9udcqa mjbs89OeUFhnicIlCFSzdCrIvUXubT7i3UmOal9smfWsgrf861A+U13d1nbstfB+DGH9 sb2zN1zH3RSz5/BBvdAXJD7m5pnvoIuJ2bRzPggdtvLn8URJ+dfwGiKxwlbuiWUlnl5T K/6N3lijbhwNsF5YWhofrhlrj2Pkca5y7Kb0d2m7rOG5uDdRgu1FeNz0vcrcSX2Xizc+ ALzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=3JLQBcPJYVX5m1uC/n9XYtV3PlLftbWAiJaHTcSV8dQ=; b=kYXcrHfaLgHd1up5xvmM0k7gYLtYMH5behs9yIcSor76mQLP2rW7sIs+05ccCeqS2G OVCJbqQR6i9YUtqHvFHS1zP1mvvWcJzBMqhPcil8HzkEkQ0pg2TIc8nYb1VBPM23k0dg UwgBh5RSoa2JApgfKcmxabsKPNFZZY6KdTCZEY8+WqtPW2kDAExIAoGXIIHzqdbX4s+3 sZ+f51agNPajkNC+vaCwq4wFd9W8TF1fxZjlDHzOh4o8HLc8SMGm0UdUMIdTsfCFVbwc q9l0SFMF3/S27Q8Uj6QXrY11O2Cm+bjDj7DViQ7bp/YTRUtShk6cl5V7d5KUaAxM3rcp avPQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RkpPcC8Tkhz6laa0gk2pkkI84Jn8FQ4V7x5Db0F2Qp1m6/tp/ECOUdqv6AhAScBoi3k X-Received: by 10.28.199.14 with SMTP id x14mr4080541wmf.106.1474571638609; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.10.1.58] (liv3d.labs.multiplay.co.uk. [82.69.141.171]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l206sm5307589wmf.15.2016.09.22.12.13.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: lagg Interfaces - don't do Gratuitous ARP? To: Slawa Olhovchenkov References: <20160921235703.GG1018@cell.glebi.us> <20160922025856.GH1018@cell.glebi.us> <348d534d-ef87-f90c-aa43-cc65c2f6283c@multiplay.co.uk> <20160922150940.GK1018@cell.glebi.us> <20160922154144.GO1018@cell.glebi.us> <0c678da4-bf72-5a81-aee1-d82a873661b7@multiplay.co.uk> <20160922160840.GP1018@cell.glebi.us> <80fd962a-fba3-d71e-a1cb-2b09181d3925@multiplay.co.uk> <20160922180230.GD2840@zxy.spb.ru> Cc: Gleb Smirnoff , Kubilay Kocak , Ryan Stone , Karl Pielorz , freebsd-net From: Steven Hartland Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 20:13:57 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160922180230.GD2840@zxy.spb.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 19:14:00 -0000 On 22/09/2016 19:02, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 05:50:09PM +0100, Steven Hartland wrote: > >> Having tested with a number of vendor switches Cisco, Extreme and more >> recently Arista only sending gratuitous ARP for IPv4 and unsolicited NA >> for IPv6 reliably resulted in rapid failover between LAGG ports. >> >> Other methods like sending correctly addressed output from the new port >> helped, we tested this with outbound pings from IPMI, but still resulted >> in noticeable recovery delay. > Can you give network diagram and switchs configs for this? > Recovery delay on lagg interface and lacp protocol must be about 2s by > default configuration. This is failover not LACP which is something quite different.