Re: rac network question
- From: Dan Norris <dannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ganstadba@xxxxxxxxxxx, oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:05:45 -0800 (PST)
Michael,
I see a huge problem and very likely a support issue as well. Basically what
he's saying is that the host will have a *single* logical network interface.
That *single* interface will need to serve as the private and public interface
and that's where Oracle Support may have some major problems.
If these blades only support 2 NICs (and you have no opportunities to expand
them), then I'd elect to leave the redundancy aside and take a NIC failure as a
whole node failure. Since the only other choice is to combine public and
private networks over a single logical interface, removing redundancy so you
have 2 separate logical/physical interfaces would be a favorable choice.
Dan
----- Original Message ----
From: Michael McMullen <ganstadba@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 9:27:11 AM
Subject: rac network question
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{font-family:Arial;color:windowtext;}
_filtered {margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt;}
div.Section1
{}
-->
Our SA’s are just setting up some HP blades for
us for a rac and he sent me this below. Just wondering if anyone on the list
sees a problem.
“Also, since the c class blades have only 2
physical nics, we are going to trunk multiple vlans through the same bonded
interface. Makes for a slightly weird setup; you may want to check it out
and play with it before this goes live.”
Other related posts:
