Looking at the section 4.3.5.1. Active-Active Bonding from documentation of the XenServer 6.5:
"Management or storage traffic. Only one of the links (NICs) in the bond is active and the other NICs remain unused unless traffic fails over to them. Configuring a management interface or secondary interface on a bonded network provides resilience." I think that you did all right. Unfortunatelly storage migration does not benefit from Active/Active bonding. 2016-08-23 12:06 GMT-03:00 Gabriel Beims Bräscher <gabrasc...@gmail.com>: > Are you using Active/Passive bond? (This is the bonding where only one NIC > carries the traffic, others NICs are there just in case the first fails; in > this case is normal other NICs stay as standby.) > > XenServer provides support for both, Active/Passive and Active/Active (VM > traffic balanced between bonded NICs). > > 2016-08-23 11:02 GMT-03:00 Alessandro Caviglione <c.alessan...@gmail.com>: > >> Mmm... LACP provide load balancing so I should have 2 channel with 1 Gbps >> throughput... >> In fact, running this command from an XS server, I'm expecting to see both >> NIC "working": >> >> time dd if=/dev/zero of=/var/run/sr-mount/UUID/testfile bs=4k >> count=300000 >> >> But I see only 1 NIC with high traffic, the second one is in complete >> standby! >> >> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Marty Godsey <ma...@gonsource.com> >> wrote: >> >> > LACP does not provide more throughput but does provide more bandwidth. >> > Basically if you have two 1G NICs in an LACP bond, you will not get a >> > stream faster than 1G.. However, since you are not load balancing, you >> can >> > have MORE 1Gb streams. >> > >> > So what your seeing is normal. >> > >> > Also do a ovs-vsctl list port and a xe bond-list params=all to make sure >> > your bonds are negotiating properly. >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > Marty Godsey >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Alessandro Caviglione [mailto:c.alessan...@gmail.com] >> > Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 4:02 PM >> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org >> > Subject: XenServer bond question >> > >> > Hi guys, >> > pheraps I should post this question on Citrix forum but I think that >> here >> > I can find a more "practical" answer based on similar infrastructure. :) >> > I've a CS 4.6 with XS 6.2 clusters and here's my network config: >> > >> > - Management + Storage: 2 NIC LACP >> > - Guest: 2 NIC LACP >> > - Public: 2 NIC LACP >> > >> > All the "2 NIC" goes to a 2 stack switches with LACP configured. >> > Now, here ( >> > http://support.citrix.com/servlet/KbServlet/download/ >> > 38321-102-714737/XenServer-6.5.0_Administrators%20Guide.pdf) >> > I see: >> > >> > [...]Management interfaces >> > >> > You can bond a management interface to another NIC so that the second >> NIC >> > provides failover for management traffic. Although configuring a LACP >> link >> > aggregation bond provides load balancing for management traffic, >> > active-active NIC bonding does not.[...] >> > >> > Ok, great, this is exactly what I need to have. >> > >> > My issue is: in all XS I see only one NIC to make traffic during Storage >> > Migration, I'm expecting that with LACP I see both NIC to make traffic, >> but >> > this does not happen. >> > >> > Do you have any experience on this topic? >> > Since we're migrating to XS6.5 adding a new cluster and moving VM, do >> you >> > have a better NIC configuration to suggest? >> > >> > Thank you very much! >> > >> > >