Re: Linux NIC bonding
- From: Andreas Piesk <a.piesk@xxxxxxx>
- To: dannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:52:54 +0100
Dan Norris schrieb:
> It was my understanding that active-active required trunking capability
> on the switches so that the switches know that both of the network ports
> are going to the same host. I don't know if that capability is available
> on these switches. That's why I chose active-passive.
that's correct. active-passive is fine if you want HA.
> As for Oracle support, I know that Oracle's biggest issue is supporting
> kernels that are not tainted. I was thinking of the 3rd party intel or
> broadcom software that the customer is considering putting on these
> nodes--not sure if or what Oracle would say about that. If anyone has
> experience with NIC teaming software from Intel or Broadcom on Linux,
> please let me know your experiences with it.
i've used iANS (intel) and BASP (broadcom). both worked but broadcom
discontinued BASP, they recommend Linux Bonding for 2.6 kernels.
> Thanks for all the replies. Please let me know if I'm wrong about my
> assumption above that special switch trunking configuration is needed to
> enable active-active. I believe it is required per the bonding.txt file
> in the kernel source that says this in the sections about active-active:
> "This mode requires the switch to have the appropriate ports configured
> for "etherchannel" or "trunking."" We're trying to do all this stuff
> without doing any real configuration on the switches.
you're right. active-active needs some support from the switch.
active-backup should work with any switch.
back to your problem: have you disabled spanning-tree on both switches?
regards,
-ap
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
