Daniel, If you're able to use the glendale alpha (i.e. VC4.0.0) it does have support for adding an IP address on the bridge interface and it also supports ECMP which might be an option for your dual links. I wrote a quick howto for ECMP on the new forum at: http://www.vyatta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20
stig > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:vyatta-users- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Daniel Stickney > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 11:42 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Vyatta-users] Request for link redundancy suggestions > > Hi Everyone, > > I have exhausted my ideas and am now looking for suggestions on how to > achieve my goal of having redundant links from two clustered Vyatta boxes. > I'll lay out the technical details and goal first. We have two edge layer > 3 switches which are stacked (with stacking modules and cable, so they > are a single logical switch with a single administration interface. For > those not familiar with stacking, they act like separate 48 port blades > in a switch chassis) and two Vyatta boxes with clustering configured. The > cluster resources are one public VIP, and one private VIP. I am > excluding the rest of the network architecture to focus in on the links > between the two Vyatta boxes and the edge (logical) switch. Our network > design requirements document stated we wanted to have no single point of > failure in our network backbone. To meet this goal, we have 2 ISP drops > with 2 cables per drop (spanning-tree used to select designated cable on > each drop) to our edge switch stack; one cable from each drop is connected > to each > switch (think "connected to each blade") so if an edge switch in the stack > dies (or "if a blade in the chassis dies") traffic can still run > through the surviving edge switch ("blade"). As mentioned, we also have > two Vyatta boxes clustered. The only part of this that I can't figure > out how to make redundant is the gigabit network cable between each Vyatta > box and the edge switch stack (named link1-1, link1-2, and link2-1, link2- > 2 > below). I am hoping to hear some suggestions on how this might be achieved > within our architecture. So far I have considered port-channeling > and spanning-tree, but neither of these appear to be a solution in this > case. Here is an ASCII drawing of this description: > > > > ISP-drop1-1---->|---------| > ISP-drop1-2---->|edge-sw-1|<----link2-1------------ > | |<----link2-2-------- | > |---------| | | > -----link1-1-->| |<----ISP-drop2-1 | | > | -link1-2->|edge-sw-2|<----ISP-drop2-2 | | > | | |---------| | | > | | | | > | | ------------------------------ | > | | | ---------------------------- > | | | | > | | | | > |----------| |----------| > | vyatta-1 | | vyatta-2 | > |----------| |----------| > > > > I realize the link1 and link2 can be done with one cable from each Vyatta > box to the edge switch stack, but we are trying to eliminate each > cable as a single point of failure by providing a backup cable from each > Vyatta box to the edge. We have no interest in applying a 'duct-tape > and bubble gum' hacked together solution on our network backbone, so I am > hoping there is a standardized method to achieve our goal. I am concerned > that I am misunderstanding something or missing an option which has left > me at my dead end. Here is how I have gotten to this logical dead end. > Vyatta (VC3) does not support Linux bonded NICs (devices named bondX) in > the command shell or web interface, so port-channeling is not an option. > Vyatta (VC3) does support bridge groups, but not officially assigning them > IPs within Xorpsh or the web interface (yes I know the Linux shell method, > but we are avoiding any unofficial hacks). With 2 bridged interfaces, > running spanning-tree with the switch ports to have only one active cable > would meet our goal, but we need the clustering to move a VIP resource > back and forth between the bridge group interfaces on the two Vyatta > boxes, and > as far as I can tell from reading the manuals and forums and guides, this > is not supported. > > Am I understanding things correctly? I am ok with the answer being "there > is no way to do what you want at this time", I just don't want to miss > an officially supported method if it exists. If we just have to use a > single cable from each Vyatta box to the edge stack, it is not optimal > but it is acceptable. > > > Thanks very much for suggestions. > -Daniel > > > -- > Daniel Stickney - Linux Systems Administrator > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > Vyatta-users mailing list > Vyatta-users@mailman.vyatta.com > http://mailman.vyatta.com/mailman/listinfo/vyatta-users _______________________________________________ Vyatta-users mailing list Vyatta-users@mailman.vyatta.com http://mailman.vyatta.com/mailman/listinfo/vyatta-users
