Channel-bonding/VLAN with Scyld
jerker at update.uu.se
Thu Jul 12 06:36:41 PDT 2001
Sorry if I've missed something important here, but why isn't it possible
to use ordinary routing instead of channel bonding to split the traffic
According to http://snafu.freedom.org/linux2.2/docs/ip-cref/ the
outgoing traffic could be split with "ip route add default scope link
nexthop dev eth0 nexthop dev eth1" or something like that.
For incoming traffic I do not know. A similiar route on every node for
every other node doesn't scale very well with many nodes I guess. Hmmm. Is
that the reason?
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, Niclas Andersson wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> I had the same problems 2 years ago but I gave up bonding. It doesn't
> improve the latency (often more important than BW) and the stability
> is too low.
> The problem is that both interfaces on one system use the same
> MAC-adress. Most switches do not tolerate two interfaces with the same
> MAC-adress not even on separate VLANs. (There are a few that does but
> can't remember them name of them now. The problem is that this piece
> of information may be a little bit tricky to find. Bonding a la Becker
> isn't that common in networks.)
> I didn't succeed with bonding on HP2424. The reason may of course be the
> D-link interfaces w. DEC21143 I used which sometimes have difficulties
> What could work is the CISCO Ethernet channel which even the HP
> ProCurve has. (Be certain that the OS in the switch is recent
> enough!) I'm not familiar with how that thing work. I only heard that
> it looked more or less the same as the becker-bonding...
> > I sent an email to the list last week regarding configuring our HP
> > Procurve 4000m switch for channel-bonding. I am still having major
> > problems!!
> > If the OS was configured for channel-bonding without any switch
> > configuration, I got only 17Mbps :-( When I turned on trunking for
> > certain ports on the switch, I got about 100Mbps, which was only a
> > slight improvement from 1 NIC (plus, it was using SA/DA, so there was
> > no node-to-node bandwidth improvement).
> > I got a response suggesting that I should setup 2 VLANs, and have all
> > eth0's on VLAN-1 and all eth1's on VLAN-2. The responder said that he
> > can get 190Mbps. The trunking configuration is supposed to be for
> > switch to switch configurations. He was using an HP 2400 (or was it
> > 2424?). The manual I have is for both models, so I assume that it
> > will work with mine as well.
> > I am still having major difficulties with getting it to work with
> > Scyld.
> Best regards,
> Niclas Andersson E-mail: nican at nsc.liu.se
> National Supercomputer Centre Phone: +46 13 281464
> Linkoping University, S-581 83 Linkoping, Sweden Fax: +46 13 282535
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
More information about the Beowulf