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: //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: //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. >