RE: [ActiveDir] HP teaming
All my DCs and most servers (any non LB) are teamed in the Switch Fault Tolerance mode. Have had a couple of instances where something happens to a 6509 and that will or would have saved the DCs availability. Dozens of 380s and 580s configured this way. Thanks, Brian Desmond [EMAIL PROTECTED] c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 8:24 AM To: activedirectory Subject: [ActiveDir] HP teaming Any for or against Hp nic teaming on DC's? Also which type would you use(if any)? Fault tolerence or load balancing? thanks List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] HP teaming
I think you mean 2950s (2800s are probably 10+ years ago). :) Tom, I'm not sure why you want to do the switch assisted LB ... are you planning close to 100mb/sec of throughput on these boxes? For reference I have three DCs servicing something like 20K clients, throughput at peak time is like 20mb/sec each. Thanks, Brian Desmond [EMAIL PROTECTED] c - 312.731.3132 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Francis Ouellet Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 9:09 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] HP teaming Tom, I'd set up teaming asap before they are promoted. This way they'll register the proper IP in DNS right away. The problematic catalyst were 2850s (that was well over 18 months ago so any hardware running the latest IOS *should* be fine (we patched each nic in a different switch for fault tolerance) As for load balancing I've don't have any experience with it. Francis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: August 17, 2005 9:51 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] HP teaming They are member servers right now with no teaming. About to become DC's. Do you have anything against switch assisted load balancing? Also, which model catalyst did you have an issue with? Thanks a lot! On 8/17/05, Francis Ouellet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've had great success using nic teaming on all my DCs running on hp Proliant hardware. They were all configured for FT. Make sure the network side of things fully supports it though, we had to upgrade a few catalyst switches for this to work correctly (I think it was an ARP issue) I'd suggest trying it on a member server first to make sure your networking hardware is capable of supporting it correctly. One last thing, are those DCs currently in place or you're considering nic teaming for future deployments? Thanks, Francis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: August 17, 2005 9:24 AM To: activedirectory Subject: [ActiveDir] HP teaming Any for or against Hp nic teaming on DC's? Also which type would you use(if any)? Fault tolerence or load balancing? thanks List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] HP teaming
I've had great success using nic teaming on all my DCs running on hp Proliant hardware. They were all configured for FT. Make sure the network side of things fully supports it though, we had to upgrade a few catalyst switches for this to work correctly (I think it was an ARP issue) I'd suggest trying it on a member server first to make sure your networking hardware is capable of supporting it correctly. One last thing, are those DCs currently in place or you're considering nic teaming for future deployments? Thanks, Francis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: August 17, 2005 9:24 AM To: activedirectory Subject: [ActiveDir] HP teaming Any for or against Hp nic teaming on DC's? Also which type would you use(if any)? Fault tolerence or load balancing? thanks List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
Re: [ActiveDir] HP teaming
They are member servers right now with no teaming. About to become DC's. Do you have anything against switch assisted load balancing? Also, which model catalyst did you have an issue with? Thanks a lot! On 8/17/05, Francis Ouellet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've had great success using nic teaming on all my DCs running on hp Proliant hardware. They were all configured for FT. Make sure the network side of things fully supports it though, we had to upgrade a few catalyst switches for this to work correctly (I think it was an ARP issue) I'd suggest trying it on a member server first to make sure your networking hardware is capable of supporting it correctly. One last thing, are those DCs currently in place or you're considering nic teaming for future deployments? Thanks, Francis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: August 17, 2005 9:24 AM To: activedirectory Subject: [ActiveDir] HP teaming Any for or against Hp nic teaming on DC's? Also which type would you use(if any)? Fault tolerence or load balancing? thanks List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] HP teaming
Tom, I'd set up teaming asap before they are promoted. This way they'll register the proper IP in DNS right away. The problematic catalyst were 2850s (that was well over 18 months ago so any hardware running the latest IOS *should* be fine (we patched each nic in a different switch for fault tolerance) As for load balancing I've don't have any experience with it. Francis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: August 17, 2005 9:51 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] HP teaming They are member servers right now with no teaming. About to become DC's. Do you have anything against switch assisted load balancing? Also, which model catalyst did you have an issue with? Thanks a lot! On 8/17/05, Francis Ouellet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've had great success using nic teaming on all my DCs running on hp Proliant hardware. They were all configured for FT. Make sure the network side of things fully supports it though, we had to upgrade a few catalyst switches for this to work correctly (I think it was an ARP issue) I'd suggest trying it on a member server first to make sure your networking hardware is capable of supporting it correctly. One last thing, are those DCs currently in place or you're considering nic teaming for future deployments? Thanks, Francis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: August 17, 2005 9:24 AM To: activedirectory Subject: [ActiveDir] HP teaming Any for or against Hp nic teaming on DC's? Also which type would you use(if any)? Fault tolerence or load balancing? thanks List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] HP teaming
What problem do you have (or are trying to prevent) that makes you want to set up teaming? I only ask because you will be adding complexity to your environment that may not be justified by the perceived benefit. On the other hand, maybe it will... Hunter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 7:51 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] HP teaming They are member servers right now with no teaming. About to become DC's. Do you have anything against switch assisted load balancing? Also, which model catalyst did you have an issue with? Thanks a lot! On 8/17/05, Francis Ouellet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've had great success using nic teaming on all my DCs running on hp Proliant hardware. They were all configured for FT. Make sure the network side of things fully supports it though, we had to upgrade a few catalyst switches for this to work correctly (I think it was an ARP issue) I'd suggest trying it on a member server first to make sure your networking hardware is capable of supporting it correctly. One last thing, are those DCs currently in place or you're considering nic teaming for future deployments? Thanks, Francis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: August 17, 2005 9:24 AM To: activedirectory Subject: [ActiveDir] HP teaming Any for or against Hp nic teaming on DC's? Also which type would you use(if any)? Fault tolerence or load balancing? thanks List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
RE: [ActiveDir] HP teaming
OK, new machine (AMD64... oh yeah!) is up and running. I'm not going to go back and catch up on everything, but this one caught my eye. We used NIC teaming for years. We had multitudes of problems, more associated with either our setup team not setting the NICs to 100/Full consistently, or the Network Engineers not doing the same. If this is NOT done, you will have issues. Also, there are specific problems that can crop up with ARP and virtual MACs that the teaming software creates. This becomes most apparent during troubleshooting, but can cause issues that only your Network Engineering team will see - and they really aren't worth irritating, because to a great degree - you need them more than they need you! :o) That being said - in 6 years of doing and managing NIC teaming, our stats showed that we had two NIC failures, which were easy to diagnose and resolve. Conversely, we had uncounted numbers of issues with ARP, MAC, and other teaming related issues that affected troubleshooting, problem resolution, and overall network (subnet or switch scope) performance when things went bad. Given that, we made a decision to bail on teaming (except for very specific systems that it had shown to be a true benefit - and DCs are far from a system that showed benefit) due to the lopsided number of issues caused as related to those actually solved. For me, that's the metric. If a solution is not really solving a problem, or is causing more problems than it is solving - why do it? It's basic Risk Management. However - YMMV. This is just my view. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 8:51 AM To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] HP teaming They are member servers right now with no teaming. About to become DC's. Do you have anything against switch assisted load balancing? Also, which model catalyst did you have an issue with? Thanks a lot! On 8/17/05, Francis Ouellet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've had great success using nic teaming on all my DCs running on hp Proliant hardware. They were all configured for FT. Make sure the network side of things fully supports it though, we had to upgrade a few catalyst switches for this to work correctly (I think it was an ARP issue) I'd suggest trying it on a member server first to make sure your networking hardware is capable of supporting it correctly. One last thing, are those DCs currently in place or you're considering nic teaming for future deployments? Thanks, Francis -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Kern Sent: August 17, 2005 9:24 AM To: activedirectory Subject: [ActiveDir] HP teaming Any for or against Hp nic teaming on DC's? Also which type would you use(if any)? Fault tolerence or load balancing? thanks List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ: http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
