cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marty Godsey <ma...@gonsource.com>
Subject RE: XenServer bond question
Date Mon, 22 Aug 2016 21:31:34 GMT
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.alessandro@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!
Mime
View raw message