[j-nsp] single ip on two interfaces

2013-03-05 Thread Mark Jones
Is it possible to have the same ip accessible via two interfaces the same
way you would on a server.  This is on an mx series router.

Mark Jones
Operations
Managed Network Systems
London Desk 519-679-5207
Windsor Desk 519-258-2333 x8417
CellĀ  519-521-8222




___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


Re: [j-nsp] single ip on two interfaces

2013-03-05 Thread Dale Shaw
Hi Mark,

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Mark Jones mjo...@mnsi.net wrote:
 Is it possible to have the same ip accessible via two interfaces the same
 way you would on a server.  This is on an mx series router.

What do you mean when you say ..the same way you would on a server ?

Assigning the same IP address to separate interfaces (logical or
physical) is usually wrong, unless each interface is in a separate
routing instance/VRF.

Can you describe your scenario?

Cheers,
Dale
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


Re: [j-nsp] single ip on two interfaces

2013-03-05 Thread Morgan McLean
I think Mark is referring to bonding under linux...right? Typically bonding
has an active / passive pair, and it can also round robin sending the
packets out individual interfaces. Obviously all returning traffic will be
destined to one mac, which is the active slave at the time.

Bonding also supports LACP though.

Morgan


On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Dale Shaw dale.shaw+j-...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Mark,

 On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Mark Jones mjo...@mnsi.net wrote:
  Is it possible to have the same ip accessible via two interfaces the same
  way you would on a server.  This is on an mx series router.

 What do you mean when you say ..the same way you would on a server ?

 Assigning the same IP address to separate interfaces (logical or
 physical) is usually wrong, unless each interface is in a separate
 routing instance/VRF.

 Can you describe your scenario?

 Cheers,
 Dale
 ___
 juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp




-- 
Thanks,
Morgan
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


Re: [j-nsp] single ip on two interfaces

2013-03-05 Thread Morgan McLean
I'm making VC's out of all our existing 3300 top of rack switches, as well
as the EX8200 core, resulting in no spanning tree bs, 40gbit lags + lacp to
the tor vc and SRX cluster, plus 2-4gbit lags to the server using lacp
bonding mode.

It works great as long as layer 4 hashing is configured server side to
allow for more than 1gbit between two hosts. Bonding isn't extremely robust
by itself.

Morgan


On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Mike Devlin juni...@meeksnet.ca wrote:

 what device(s)?

 reth interfaces on SRX's or AE interfaces on EX's sounds like what you are
 looking for.

 virtual chassis between a couple EX switches, and LACP on the ae interface
 which has its physical interfaces across 2 physically separated switches
 connected to a server that is using LACP as well should work.  I know
 people have done it, i just cant personally speak from experience




 On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Morgan McLean wrx...@gmail.com wrote:

 I think Mark is referring to bonding under linux...right? Typically
 bonding
 has an active / passive pair, and it can also round robin sending the
 packets out individual interfaces. Obviously all returning traffic will be
 destined to one mac, which is the active slave at the time.

 Bonding also supports LACP though.

 Morgan


 On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Dale Shaw dale.shaw+j-...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Hi Mark,
 
  On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:09 AM, Mark Jones mjo...@mnsi.net wrote:
   Is it possible to have the same ip accessible via two interfaces the
 same
   way you would on a server.  This is on an mx series router.
 
  What do you mean when you say ..the same way you would on a server ?
 
  Assigning the same IP address to separate interfaces (logical or
  physical) is usually wrong, unless each interface is in a separate
  routing instance/VRF.
 
  Can you describe your scenario?
 
  Cheers,
  Dale
  ___
  juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
  https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
 



 --
 Thanks,
 Morgan
 ___
 juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp





-- 
Thanks,
Morgan
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp