From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 22 14:42:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2423A1065686; Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:42:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhary@unsane.co.uk) Received: from unsane.co.uk (unsane-pt.tunnel.tserv5.lon1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f08:110::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 911148FC13; Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:42:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhary@unsane.co.uk) Received: from crab.unsane.co.uk (crab.unsane.co.uk [10.0.0.111]) (authenticated bits=0) by unsane.co.uk (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id m5MEfxQu067679 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 22 Jun 2008 15:42:00 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jhary@unsane.co.uk) Message-ID: <485E647D.1030301@unsane.co.uk> Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 15:41:01 +0100 From: Vince Hoffman User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080507) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: martes@mgwigglesworth.com References: <1213691523.22762.16.camel@localhost> <20080618172216.GA76058@citylink.fud.org.nz> <1213846763.14151.1.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1213846763.14151.1.camel@localhost> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , Andrew Thompson Subject: Re: Use lagg(4) or Use Layer-4 Load Balancing? 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: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:42:02 -0000 Martes G Wigglesworth wrote: > I was attempting to find good information on how to achieve a type of > bonding using advanced routing on FreeBSD, such as with layer-4 routers, > that can bond multiple sources into a single overall larger source for > logical backbone creation for networks. > You could have a look at ng_one2many(4) I've never used it but it sounds like it could be what you are after according to the manpage. Vince > > On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 13:22 -0400, Andrew Thompson wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 04:32:03AM -0400, Martes G Wigglesworth wrote: >>> Greetings all. >>> >>> I have been attempting to research what I have been informed is >>> actually accomplished with layer-4 load balancing. I have seen many >>> articles and reviews that indicate that lagg(4) will accomplish the >>> teaming of multiple internet access sorces into a single logical pipe, >>> however, I have tried this using a dumb switch two nic interfaces and >>> this simply is not the case. >>> >>> I am new and may not have enough cool equipment around, however, aside >>> from using the fail-over mode for redundancy, and lacp on a supported >>> switch, then if lagg(4) could really combine multiple sources into one >>> for use as a larger overall backbone, then I should be able to get >>> doulbed bandwidth using two separate ports on an unmanaged switch using >>> some option on the lagg(4) driver, which is not the cast.(if this is >>> wrong I would be happy to get the correct information, however I have a >>> few network engineer references that say that you cannot do anything >>> more than layer-2 lacp with appropriate equipment to create an >>> isp-supported trunk) Even in the on-lamp interview the 7.0 developer >>> implies that you can do what I am attempting to research however, it is >>> not possible at layer 2 without an end-point. >> How are you testing this? You need to have multiple IP flows in order to >> fully utilise the multiple links. See this snippet from the handbook >> (i'll put it in the man page too). >> >> "Since frame ordering is mandatory on Ethernet links then any traffic >> between two stations always flows over the same physical link limiting >> the maximum speed to that of one interface. The transmit algorithm >> attempts to use as much information as it can to distinguish different >> traffic flows and balance across the available interfaces." >> >> >> Does that answer your question, you will not get more speed on a single >> download. >> >> >> Andrew >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"