Hi Zaman, There are some configurations that need to be made to the switch to allow both nics to come up with the same mac. I am by no means a network expert, so I cannot think of the name of the protocol off the top of my head. I am willing to wager that the lack of that configuration is the cause of your packet loss. On Nov 9, 2012 8:22 PM, "Zama Ques" <quesz...@yahoo.in> wrote:
> > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Digimer <li...@alteeve.ca> > To: Zama Ques <quesz...@yahoo.in>; linux clustering < > linux-cluster@redhat.com> > Cc: > Sent: Saturday, 10 November 2012 8:24 AM > Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Packet loss after configuring Ethernet bonding > > On 11/09/2012 09:26 PM, Zama Ques wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Need help on resolving a issue related to implementing High Availability > at network level . I understand that this is not the right forum to ask > this question , but since it is related to HA and Linux , I am asking here > and I feel somebody here will have answer to the issues I am facing . > > > > I am trying to implement Ethernet Bonding , Both the interface in my > server are connected to two different network switches . > > > > My configuration is as follows: > > > > ======== > > # cat /proc/net/bonding/bond0 > > > > Ethernet Channel Bonding Driver: v3.6.0 (September 26, 2009) > > > > Bonding Mode: adaptive load balancing Primary Slave: None Currently > > Active Slave: eth0 MII Status: up MII Polling Interval (ms): 0 Up Delay > > (ms): 0 Down Delay (ms): 0 > > > > Slave Interface: eth0 MII Status: up Speed: 1000 Mbps Duplex: full Link > > Failure Count: 0 Permanent HW addr: e4:e1:5b:d0:11:10 Slave queue ID: 0 > > > > Slave Interface: eth1 MII Status: up Speed: 1000 Mbps Duplex: full Link > > Failure Count: 0 Permanent HW addr: e4:e1:5b:d0:11:14 Slave queue ID: 0 > > ------------ > > # cat /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/mode > > > > balance-alb 6 > > > > > > # cat /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/miimon > > 0 > > > > ============ > > > > > > The issue for me is that I am seeing packet loss after configuring > bonding . Tried connecting both the interface to the same switch , but > still seeing the packet loss . Also , tried changing miimon value to 100 , > but still seeing the packet loss. > > > > What I am missing in the configuration ? Any help will be highly > appreciated in resolving the problem . > > > > > > > > Thanks > > Zaman > > > You didn't share any details on your configuration, but I will assume > > you are using corosync. > > > The only supported bonding mode is Active/Passive (mode=1). I've > > personally tried all modes, out of curiosity, and all had problems. The > > short of it is that if you need more that 1 gbit of performance, buy > > faster cards. > > > If you are interested in what I use, it's documented here: > > > https://alteeve.ca/w/2-Node_Red_Hat_KVM_Cluster_Tutorial#Network > > > I've used this setup in several production clusters and have tested > > failure are recovery extensively. It's proven very stable. :) > > > Thanks Digimer for the quick response and pointing me to the link . I am > yet to reach cluster configuration , initially trying to understand > ethernet bonding before going into cluster configuration. So , option for > me is only to use Active/Passive bonding mode in case of clustered > environment. > Few more clarifications needed , Can we use other bonding modes in non > clustered environment . I am seeing packet loss in other modes . Also , > the support of using only mode=1 in cluster environment is it a > restriction of RHEL Cluster suite or it is by design . > > Will be great if you clarify these queries . > > Thanks in Advance > Zaman > > -- > Linux-cluster mailing list > Linux-cluster@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster >
-- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
