[isalist] Re: Dual Nic'ed HP proliant

Or just the one link to the Internet...

t


On 10/14/06 7:08 AM, "Jim Harrison" <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx> spoketh to all:

> “why 4 single-port NICs have an issue”
> ..this is an easy one.
> Each single-port card has to use the motherboard’s PCI bus to 
> communicate with
> other port controllers at the driver level, while multi-port cards can do so
> “internally”.  As a result, single-port NICs actually makes for 
> less, not more
> efficient operation in the kernel drivers. Regarding the 
> “redundancy”
> question, you’re statistically more likely to lose a MB than you are a 
> plug-in
> card.
>  
> Maybe Glenn should ask them if they’re willing to tolerate the single
> point-of-failure that is the motherboard.
> While they’re at it, how redundant is their UPS or their environment 
> control
> system?  These represent single points of failure that can take out their
> entire data center; not just a single server.
>  
> 
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Gerald G. Young
> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 5:51 AM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: Dual Nic'ed HP proliant
>  
> 
> Oh, yes.  I know the type. :)  Separate NIC on each card so if a single card
> fails you only lose one NIC.  I have a similar kind of thing going with a 600
> person Exchange cluster: 2 VSs with 300 on each so that if one database takes
> a dump they don't lose all 600.  If ya got the money for it, though...? :)
> 
>  
> 
> I'd be curious about why 4 single-port NICs have an issue.  Do be sure to get
> those details. :)
> 
>  
> 
> Oh, and now that they're on the 2 dual-port NICs, how did they set up teaming?
> Did they make both ports on a single card part of the same team?  Or did they
> make 1 port from each card part of the same team. If they haven't done the
> latter already, you might be able to "save some face" by suggesting they do
> that so that at least if a single card does go down, they still have
> connectivity through the other one; that gets it pretty close to their
> redundancy with 4 NICs since in either case a minimum of two physical failures
> need to occur before network services are impacted.
> 
>  
> 
> Cordially yours,
> 
> Jerry G. Young II
> 
>  
> 
> 
> From: Glenn P. JOHNSTON
> Sent: 2006/10/14 (土) 1:14
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: Dual Nic'ed HP proliant
> 
> Yep.
>  
> But all too often there is a world of difference between what 'actually is the
> case', and what the non technical client perceives as 'being the case' !
>  
> In this case, their perception is very different to reality, but they are not
> going to believe me, no mater how I tell them, as they perceive 'me' as being
> the one who has solved there initial problem, by getting rid of there much
> dearly loved 4 nic redundancy.
>  
> Such is life !
>  
> As a side note, I'd really like to know how a company of 109 people justifies
> a 56Mbit frame relay internet connection, that's a very thick internet pipe
> for just over 100 people !
> 
>  
> 
> GJ. 
> 
> 
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Jim Harrison
> Sent: Saturday, 14 October 2006 14:59
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: Dual Nic'ed HP proliant
> This is stupid; four single-port NICs are no more “redundant” 
> than two
> dual-port NICs.
> If they’re that anal, it’s time to scale their server out.
>  
> 
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Glenn P. JOHNSTON
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 5:02 PM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: Dual Nic'ed HP proliant
>  
> HP Field service has swapped the 4 single port Nic's for 2 dual port ones. 1
> fibre, 1 gigabit. Some 3rd level support guy put an entry in the call log,
> that this is a know issue, and to replace with dual port nic's. I'm trying to
> get more details on exactly what the issue is.
>  
> Removed to old nic's from the teaming, added the new dual port ones to the
> teaming, rebooted, everythings working fine. all 4 nic's are connected and
> traffic is flowing on all 4 links. Quite happily fails over to the other link
> when 1 is unplugged, and will switch back and forth.
>  
> Now the client is not happy, they see this as 2 single nic's and that they
> have lost redundancy, and they now have 2 single points of failure, which is
> probably partially true.
>  
> 
> 
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Ball, Dan
> Sent: Friday, 13 October 2006 21:37
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: Dual Nic'ed HP proliant
> If it is working when cords are unplugged, it is getting confused about which
> route to take, so look at your teaming settings first.
>  
> I don’t have one handy to look at, but I recall there being a few 
> different
> ways to set up the teaming.  I had mine set up to use the same MAC, same IP,
> but I don’t recall what setting I used for load-balancing (I think it 
> was
> fail-over).  
>  
> You also need to set the same style of load-balancing on the device it is
> plugged into…
>  
> 
> 
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Glenn P. JOHNSTON
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 1:04 AM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [isalist] Re: Dual Nic'ed HP proliant
>  
> 
> NLB is definately disabled.
> 
>  
> 
> The setup is currently running fine in production with 2 nic's unplugged, but
> I have been left with the task of solving the issue.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Jim Harrison
> Sent: Fri 13/Oct/2006 14:37
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Re: Dual Nic'ed HP proliant
> 
> http://www.isaserver.org/
> -------------------------------------------------------
>  
> ISA doesn't know or care about teaming, Q-tagging or any other layer-2
> protocols.
> Make sure you don't also have NLB enabled, as NLB and teaming is not a
> supported combination.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isalist-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Glenn P. JOHNSTON
> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 4:45 PM
> To: isalist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isalist] Dual Nic'ed HP proliant
> 
> http://www.isaserver.org/
> -------------------------------------------------------
>  
> Hi,
> 
> Currently working on a brand new server, it a new HP proliant, quadriple
> nic'ed.
> 
> It's running W3KR2 with all updates to date applied, domain member, all
> HP updates for the HP software applied, nic's have the latest firmware
> applied. it's using the HP server nic teaming software. ISA2004
> installed with all updates to date applied.
> 
> The Internet connection use 2 gigabit nic's teamed to connect to a  56M
> frame relay connection via a watchguard firewall (Let's not get into the
> watchguard discussion, I have to work with what the company has in
> place) , via cat5e cable.
> 
> They are 4 separate nic's and not dual ported ones.
> 
> The LAN connection uses 2 fibre channel nic's teamed to go to a dual
> redundant cisco switch.
> 
> Before ISA was installed, teaming was working fine, both the internet
> and the lan were accessable.
> 
> After installing ISA, neither the internet or the LAN is accessable,
> unless 1 of the teamed nic's is unplugged on both sides. i.e. 1 internet
> nic unplugged + 1 lan nic unplugged eerything works like a dream.
> 
> But plug either or both of the 2 that were unplugged in, and neither the
> internet nor the LAN is accessable.
> 
> Disable the firewall services, and reboot, everything is fine with all 4
> NIC's plugged in.
> 
> HP field service have been twice out replaced the nic's, ran diag's and
> they are pointing the finger at the ISA server. Saying it's not
> compatable with the HP nic teaming software, but can not point out any
> documentation to support this. Searching the internet also drew a blank.
> 
> The company configured the server using the proliant configurader, so I
> am assuming that everything is compatable, and the field service people
> responded in the afermative, when asked is everything compatable.
> 
> Does anyone have any experience or suggestions on this ??
> 
> Glenn
> ------------------------------------------------------
> List Archives: http://www.freelists.org/archives/isalist/
> ISA Server Newsletter: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp
> ISA Server Articles and Tutorials:
> http://www.isaserver.org/articles_tutorials/
> ISA Server Blogs: http://blogs.isaserver.org/
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Visit TechGenix.com for more information about our other sites:
> http://www.techgenix.com/
> ------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe visit http://www.isaserver.org/pages/isalist.asp
> Report abuse to listadmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> List Archives: http://www.freelists.org/archives/isalist/
> ISA Server Newsletter: http://www.isaserver.org/pages/newsletter.asp
> ISA Server Articles and Tutorials:
> http://www.isaserver.org/articles_tutorials/
> ISA Server Blogs: http://blogs.isaserver.org/
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Visit TechGenix.com for more information about our other sites:
> http://www.techgenix.com/
> ------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe visit http://www.isaserver.org/pages/isalist.asp
> Report abuse to listadmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned.
> All mail to and from this domain is GFI-scanned.
> 


Other related posts: