Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
Am Sonntag, 12. Oktober 2014, 20:25:05 schrieb Manuel Bouyer: > > Or does NetBSD did not know the concept of a IP of a bridge (as i.e. on > > linux) or is there any other official comparable concept? > On NetBSD there's no concept of a IP of a bridge. ah, OK, now i got the point. It seem's netBSD is going another way then Linux or other Free/OpenBSD here - this was new to me. https://www.freebsd.org/doc/de_DE.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/network-bridging.html http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq6.html#Bridge Is there any reason why NetBSD does not offer such a feature? I agree that a bridge primarily is a "level 2 tool", but we have several applications/appliances where the ability to configure an IP (level 3) on a bridge interface (level 2) is very handy (as often to find even in other, much more famous applications) as it easily can be done even before / without any interface bound to the bridge. One of my targets in mind is to migrate some of that "apps" to NetBSD in the future for different reasons. So it would be nice to understand the reason[s] behind this difference. sorry for the noise so far. many thanks and cheerioh, Niels. -- --- Niels Dettenbach Syndicat IT & Internet http://www.syndicat.com PGP: https://syndicat.com/pub_key.asc --- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Manuel Bouyer wrote: > It does with LACP, I don't know if the link status is considered when > in round-robin mode. > > Anyway if I had to setup something like that I'd use bridge with > spanning-tree to select the best path. This way you get failover for > more cases than just the local link failure. With Spanning-tree method, in my company network people use enhaced SPT protocols (mainly Cisco SPT protocols that converge more faster, etc.--), and I think that hey won't be compatible (they have denied in the past to connect not Cisco switches to switching infraestructure because of this). ¿Is there some performance degradation using this bridge configuration over the case of no bridge setup? With IPMP and bonding you can use link failure test, but you can use more advanced methods: 1- Solaris IPMP can use configure a test address in every interface. I think that does pings to address that you can configure or , that it extracts from the network. http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26502_01/html/E28993/gfazs.html 2- Linux Bonding can uses basic link monitoring (miimon) or arp monitoring configuring one(several) target(s). https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 03:15:21AM +0200, Jose Luis Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Manuel Bouyer > wrote: > > It does with LACP, I don't know if the link status is considered when > > in round-robin mode. > > > > Anyway if I had to setup something like that I'd use bridge with > > spanning-tree to select the best path. This way you get failover for > > more cases than just the local link failure. > > With Spanning-tree method, in my company network people use enhaced > SPT protocols (mainly Cisco SPT protocols that converge more faster, > etc.--), and I think that hey won't be compatible (they have denied in > the past to connect not Cisco switches to switching infraestructure > because of this). > > ¿Is there some performance degradation using this bridge configuration > over the case of no bridge setup? Maybe a bit (I've not done precise measurements), but no more than with agr(4). -- Manuel Bouyer NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:55:58PM +0200, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet) wrote: > On 12. Oktober 2014 10:08:43 MESZ, Manuel Bouyer > wrote: > >No, on NetBSD you can't configure an IP address on a bridge interface. > > hmm, ok, but this confuses me a bit. > > If you define the IP on one of the n ifaces of a bridge how the IP could be > reached/managed/used if that iface leaves the bridge or "just" got > down/deleted? It should not leave the bridge or be deleted. If it's down, it should'nt matter if the bridge has a better path anyway. > > Or does NetBSD did not know the concept of a IP of a bridge (as i.e. on > linux) or is there any other official comparable concept? On NetBSD there's no concept of a IP of a bridge. -- Manuel Bouyer NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 3:55 AM, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet) wrote: > On 12. Oktober 2014 10:08:43 MESZ, Manuel Bouyer > wrote: >>No, on NetBSD you can't configure an IP address on a bridge interface. > > hmm, ok, but this confuses me a bit. > > If you define the IP on one of the n ifaces of a bridge how the IP could be > reached/managed/used if that iface leaves the bridge or "just" got > down/deleted? > > Or does NetBSD did not know the concept of a IP of a bridge (as i.e. on > linux) or is there any other official comparable concept? > > Many thanks for any hint. I think he's saying that NetBSD is behaving as a layer 2 switch with 2 links. Spanning tree "solves" which interface is active elsewhere (or can NetBSD run it? I don't know). Since you have a switch, frames are sent to whatever interface owns the IP via the arp table. So it only takes 1 of the 2 links to be up, doesn't matter which. So it's not load balancing, but I think that was the point of the original post. And I'm confused about "link1" in agr as well now that I read it again. Andy
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On 12. Oktober 2014 10:08:43 MESZ, Manuel Bouyer wrote: >No, on NetBSD you can't configure an IP address on a bridge interface. hmm, ok, but this confuses me a bit. If you define the IP on one of the n ifaces of a bridge how the IP could be reached/managed/used if that iface leaves the bridge or "just" got down/deleted? Or does NetBSD did not know the concept of a IP of a bridge (as i.e. on linux) or is there any other official comparable concept? Many thanks for any hint. best regards, Niels. -- Niels Dettenbach Syndicat IT&Internet http://www.syndicat.com
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 08:27:06AM +0200, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat IT&Internet) wrote: > On 12. Oktober 2014 05:22:19 MESZ, Andy Ruhl wrote: > >If so, where do you set the IP address(es)? Is there some virtual > >layer for a single IP address? > > ...in case of a bridge, usually on the bridge interface. No, on NetBSD you can't configure an IP address on a bridge interface. -- Manuel Bouyer NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 08:22:19PM -0700, Andy Ruhl wrote: > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Manuel Bouyer > wrote: > > It does with LACP, I don't know if the link status is considered when > > in round-robin mode. > > > > Anyway if I had to setup something like that I'd use bridge with > > spanning-tree to select the best path. This way you get failover for > > more cases than just the local link failure. > > If I understand this correct, you are effectively setting up more than > one interface into something like a switch on the NetBSD host, and > attaching them both to another switch (or switches) and letting > spanning tree figure out the path? > > If so, where do you set the IP address(es)? Is there some virtual > layer for a single IP address? I set it on one of the physical interfaces. The bridge will be able to take packets to the other interface if needed. -- Manuel Bouyer NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On 12. Oktober 2014 05:22:19 MESZ, Andy Ruhl wrote: >If so, where do you set the IP address(es)? Is there some virtual >layer for a single IP address? ...in case of a bridge, usually on the bridge interface. cheerioh, Niels. -- Niels Dettenbach Syndicat IT&Internet http://www.syndicat.com
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Manuel Bouyer wrote: > It does with LACP, I don't know if the link status is considered when > in round-robin mode. > > Anyway if I had to setup something like that I'd use bridge with > spanning-tree to select the best path. This way you get failover for > more cases than just the local link failure. If I understand this correct, you are effectively setting up more than one interface into something like a switch on the NetBSD host, and attaching them both to another switch (or switches) and letting spanning tree figure out the path? If so, where do you set the IP address(es)? Is there some virtual layer for a single IP address? Maybe I missed something simple... Andy
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 03:55:23PM +, Michael van Elst wrote: > bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) writes: > > >On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Jose Luis Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > > >> How does link1 mode work?. Is it active/passive? Does it work using > >> the link status of the ehternet connections? If this is the way it > >> works, it is ok for my setup. > > >Ho does other OSes decide which link to use in such a setup ? > >At first glance I'd say that if you want to have the same behavior as > >linux bond, you'd need both link0 and link1. > > The most simple mode is an active/passive failover. The active link is > used for sending and only when it fails(*) the other link is used. > > (*) Failure is detected either by looking at the carrier status or by > sending arp probes to a configured peer. > > agr(4) doesn't seem to support this. It does with LACP, I don't know if the link status is considered when in round-robin mode. Anyway if I had to setup something like that I'd use bridge with spanning-tree to select the best path. This way you get failover for more cases than just the local link failure. -- Manuel Bouyer NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) writes: >On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Jose Luis Rodriguez Garcia wrote: >> How does link1 mode work?. Is it active/passive? Does it work using >> the link status of the ehternet connections? If this is the way it >> works, it is ok for my setup. >Ho does other OSes decide which link to use in such a setup ? >At first glance I'd say that if you want to have the same behavior as >linux bond, you'd need both link0 and link1. The most simple mode is an active/passive failover. The active link is used for sending and only when it fails(*) the other link is used. (*) Failure is detected either by looking at the carrier status or by sending arp probes to a configured peer. agr(4) doesn't seem to support this. Packets are distributed over all links, either round-robin or by selecting a link based on a hash of the packet.
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 10:12:24AM +0200, Jose Luis Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > I have looked the agr page, and I have googled for agr for a while, > without finding how link1 mode works. > > Because I will connect the server to two switches, I can't use LACP > mode. I will have to use link1 mode. > > How does link1 mode work?. Is it active/passive? Does it work using > the link status of the ehternet connections? If this is the way it > works, it is ok for my setup. Ho does other OSes decide which link to use in such a setup ? At first glance I'd say that if you want to have the same behavior as linux bond, you'd need both link0 and link1. -- Manuel Bouyer NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
I have looked the agr page, and I have googled for agr for a while, without finding how link1 mode works. Because I will connect the server to two switches, I can't use LACP mode. I will have to use link1 mode. How does link1 mode work?. Is it active/passive? Does it work using the link status of the ehternet connections? If this is the way it works, it is ok for my setup. > See the man page for agr(4). > > I haven't actually tried it but it looks fairly straightforward. > > Andy
Re: Network redundancy (Linux bonding/Solaris IPMP)
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Jose Luis Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > Is there some way to have redundancy in the network connection of a NetBSD > server, similar to Linux bonding,Solaris IPMP or Windows Teaming? > > Best regards See the man page for agr(4). I haven't actually tried it but it looks fairly straightforward. Andy
