From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 9 14:53:14 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D346F106564A for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 14:53:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jon@radel.com) Received: from wave.radel.com (wave.radel.com [216.143.151.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313A78FC12 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 14:53:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wave.radel.com (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.1.6) with PIPE id 10587860; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 08:52:57 -0500 Received: from [192.168.43.246] (account jon@radel.com HELO winesap.local) by wave.radel.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.6) with ESMTP-TLS id 10587858; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 08:52:43 -0500 Message-ID: <4F5A0B2A.2000706@radel.com> Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 08:52:42 -0500 From: Jon Radel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bo wang References: <4F5818A4.20509@hdk5.net> <4F58752E.2010405@my.gd> <4F59C8A0.9030405@my.gd> In-Reply-To: <4F59C8A0.9030405@my.gd> Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms000300050704070105030901" X-Radel.com-MailScanner-Information: Please contact Jon for more information X-Radel.com-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro CLI mailer X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fwd: Some questions about Link Aggregation and Failover X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:53:14 -0000 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms000300050704070105030901 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/9/12 4:08 AM, Damien Fleuriot wrote: > > Well that's exactly what I'm trying to show you. > > > > Link aggregation will *NOT* allow you to get 200mbs between 2 servers b= y > sending data over the 2 cables. > > As per the example I pasted below, link aggregation uses a load > balancing algorithm to share the traffic across several links. > > It will *NOT* use *BOTH* links for a single "source ip - destination ip= " > pair. All of which is explained at least twice in the document the OP claims=20 to have used http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/network-aggregation.html= once in the section on LACP: "LACP balances outgoing traffic across the active ports based on hashed=20 protocol header information and accepts incoming traffic from any active = port. The hash includes the Ethernet source and destination address,=20 and, if available, the VLAN tag, and the IPv4/IPv6 source and=20 destination address." and once in Example 32-1, which is presumably being used as the cookbook = for this project: "Since frame ordering is mandatory on Ethernet links then any traffic=20 between two stations always flows over the same physical link limiting=20 the maximum speed to that of one interface. The transmit algorithm=20 attempts to use as much information as it can to distinguish different=20 traffic flows and balance across the available interfaces." Has use of Gig ethernet been considered? --=20 --Jon Radel jon@radel.com --------------ms000300050704070105030901--