I guess it depends if those virtual interfaces are going to different VLANs. If your network team is using "VLAN tagging", then each of those virtuals could travel different networks (perhaps to a DR site?).
Doesn't help much for *real* interface bonding, but that's one use for it. Mike. -----Original Message----- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ayer, Paul W Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 2:34 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: channel bonding Good afternoon all, Have been having good success getting channel bonding going. We also have Vswitch as well. But it dawns on me that channel bonding and Vswitch (the way we have them) really don't go together. In Vswitch we have two OSA's one active and one backup. If in VM we setup two sets of virtual NIC that become eth0 and eth1 going into the same Vswitch we really are only Going to use one OSA... So my thinking is that what we really need it two Vswitches with one OSA in each. No backup OSA needed, but would be nice to have. Then when we channel bond the eth0 and eth1 they really use to different OSA's and we can then get double the data flow. Anyone else doing an channel bonding with Vswitches as well? Also doing via RHEL 4.4 Any input would be helpful. Thanks, Paul... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
