[nog] LACP between swiches and Linux

[Svetlana Atanasova]

Sorry for spamming, now I saw you are asking for different configuration 
:) with TWO switches and it wouldn't be very helpful for you.

On 12/01/2014 10:37 AM, Svetlana Atanasova wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yes, we are using it and it's working like a charm. It's between Cisco 
> 4948-10G and linux box. Here are the specific configurations:
>
> Cisco:
>  channel-protocol lacp
>  channel-group X mode active
>
> I'm not sure if it was related to problems with etherchannel, but it's 
> a good idea to turn off flow control with command "flowcontrol receive 
> off". Anyway I don't like how flow control works between cisco 
> switches and linux boxes, when it's on there are too many pause frames 
> and it's only on the ports where linux boxes are connected.
>
> Linux:
> in /etc/modprobe.d/bonding.conf
> options bond0 miimon=100 mode=4 lacp_rate=1
>
> lacp_rate=1 is the most important in this configuration
>
>
> Best Ragards,
> ???????? ????????? / Svetlana Atanasova
> ?????? ?????? ????????????? / Senior Network Administrator
> 1309 ?????, ???????? / 1309 Sofia, Bulgaria
> ??. ????? ????? (?????) No 168 / 168 Naicho Tzanov str.
> tel: (+359 2) 434 04 00
> <http://www.netissat.bg>
> <http://www.vmfgroup.com/bg>
> ???? ????????? ? ????????? ?? ???????? ?? ?????????? ???? ? ?????????. 
> ???????????? ? ???? (??????????? ?????? ????????? ??? ???? ???????) e 
> ????????????? ???? ?? ????????/??? ? ??????? ??????????? ??????????. 
> ????? ????????????? ??????????, ????????? ??? ??????????????? ?? ???? 
> ????????? ??? ????? ?? ???? ? ?????? ?????????. ??? ??? ?? ???????? 
> ?????? ??????, ???? ?? ????????? ????????, ???? ??????? ??????????? ? 
> ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ???????. ????????? ?? ???? ??????????? ?? 
> ???????, ?????????, ???????? ?/??? ????????? ????????? ?? 
> ????????????, ???? ?? ???????? ?? ???????????? ?? ??? ?????? ???????, 
> ????????? ?????? ??? ?????????? ?? ??????, ????? ????????? ? ???????? 
> ?? ??????????? ?? ???????????? ????.
> On 11/28/2014 09:28 PM, Marian Marinov wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Hi guys,
>> I'm curious have anyone managed to make LACP working between two Switches and one Linux box?
>> The setup is simple, the linux box has two ethernets, each connected to separate switches. The switches have direct
>> connectivity between them.
>>
>> Is it at all possible. The protocol it self does not impose restrictions on LACP ports to be on the same physical
>> device, but I don't know if there is an HW implementation that can actually do that.
>>
>> Marian
>>
>> - -- 
>> Marian Marinov
>> Founder & CEO of 1H Ltd.
>> Jabber/GTalk:hackman at jabber.org
>> ICQ: 7556201
>> Mobile: +359 886 660 270
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v2
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAlR4zMEACgkQ4mt9JeIbjJTrBgCePTcxy0veC8b8ZEdZLG/jRX5I
>> ioUAoJmlkQ7G/yaki43kIJGSUNgKPz7T
>> =4p9P
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nog mailing list
>> Nog at nog.bg
>> http://lists.ludost.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nog mailing list
> Nog at nog.bg
> http://lists.ludost.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nog

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ludost.net/pipermail/nog/attachments/20141201/c0f481c9/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 3070 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ludost.net/pipermail/nog/attachments/20141201/c0f481c9/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 2292 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ludost.net/pipermail/nog/attachments/20141201/c0f481c9/attachment-0001.png>