Daniel Eischen deisc...@freebsd.org wrote:
My rc.conf is something like this:
#
# For now, force ath0 to use the same MAC address as xl0.
# This works around a bug where lagg is unable to set the
# MAC address of the underlying wlan0 interface.
#
ifconfig_ath0=ether 01:02:03:04:05:06
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, David DeSimone wrote:
Daniel Eischen deisc...@freebsd.org wrote:
My rc.conf is something like this:
#
# For now, force ath0 to use the same MAC address as xl0.
# This works around a bug where lagg is unable to set the
# MAC address of the underlying wlan0 interface.
#
On 09/12/2012 10:51 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for checking. I've used lagg(4) with igb, just not on 9.x.
You're right, it seems to be pointing to
On 11/09/2012 22:03, Giulio Ferro wrote:
Well, there definitely seems to be a problem with igb and lagg.
igb alone works as it should, but doesn't seem to work properly in lagg.
To be sure I started from scratch from a 9.0 release with nothing but:
/etc/rc.conf
On 09/11/2012 11:34 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Sep 11, 2012 2:12 PM, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org
mailto:au...@zirakzigil.org wrote:
Well, there definitely seems to be a problem with igb and lagg.
igb alone works as it should, but doesn't seem to work properly in lagg.
To be
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org wrote:
On 09/11/2012 11:34 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Sep 11, 2012 2:12 PM, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org
mailto:au...@zirakzigil.org wrote:
Well, there definitely seems to be a problem with igb and lagg.
igb
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org
wrote:
On 09/11/2012 11:34 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Sep 11, 2012 2:12 PM, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org
mailto:au...@zirakzigil.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for checking. I've used lagg(4) with igb, just not on 9.x.
You're right, it seems to be pointing to the igb(4) driver in 9.x
compared to 9.0.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks for checking. I've used lagg(4) with igb, just not on 9.x.
You're
igb+lagg worked for us on 8.3. Haven't tried it since moving to 9.0
and 9-STABLE on those three boxes.
igb+lagg doesn't work for him on 9.0. Although, I don't recall if
non-LACP options were tried earlier in this thread, or if it's just
the LACP mode that's failing. If one mode
Well, there definitely seems to be a problem with igb and lagg.
igb alone works as it should, but doesn't seem to work properly in lagg.
To be sure I started from scratch from a 9.0 release with nothing but:
/etc/rc.conf
---
ifconfig_igb0=inet
On Sep 11, 2012 2:12 PM, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org wrote:
Well, there definitely seems to be a problem with igb and lagg.
igb alone works as it should, but doesn't seem to work properly in lagg.
To be sure I started from scratch from a 9.0 release with nothing but:
/etc/rc.conf
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Giulio Ferro wrote:
Well, there definitely seems to be a problem with igb and lagg.
igb alone works as it should, but doesn't seem to work properly in lagg.
To be sure I started from scratch from a 9.0 release with nothing but:
/etc/rc.conf
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Freddie Cash wrote:
On Sep 11, 2012 2:12 PM, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org wrote:
cloned_interfaces=lagg0
ifconfig_lagg0=laggproto lacp laggport igb1 laggport igb2 laggport igb3
192.168.x.x/24
sshd_enable=YES
---
We've had similar problems with lagg at work, each lagg is made up of
one igb and one em port, sometimes for no apparent reason they seem to
stop passing through traffic. The easiest way we've found to get it
working again is ifconfig down and up on one of the physical
interfaces. This is on 8.1
No idea anybody why this bug happens? Patches?
On 08/29/2012 10:22 PM, Giulio Ferro wrote:
On 08/28/2012 11:12 AM, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
Hi Giulio,
Just to clear things up:
igb0: 192.168.9.60/24
lagg0: 192.168.12.21/24
Yes.
Actually I notice now that the lagg0 address is different from
schrieb Pete French am 28.08.2012 11:48 (localtime):
No answer, so it seems that link aggregation doesn't really work in freebsd,
this may help others with the same problem...
I used to use LCAP a lot - this was a few years ago, but the critical
point was that it only worked if all the cables
Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and
static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is
impossible for two separate switches.
These switches had a port where you could connect them together and
then configure each to know about the other
schrieb Pete French am 29.08.2012 11:38 (localtime):
Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and
static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is
impossible for two separate switches.
These switches had a port where you could connect them together
schrieb Harald Schmalzbauer am 29.08.2012 12:18 (localtime):
schrieb Pete French am 29.08.2012 11:38 (localtime):
Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and
static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is
impossible for two separate switches.
Have you checked that Windows really did LACP in your case? Sounds like
it was no real hardware stack, so probably Windos just activated RSTP.
FreeBSD doesn't detect any LACP/RSTP configuration features, but windows
does with some NIC verndor's drivers.
That is quite possible - I didnt set
On Aug 29, 2012, at 1:18 PM, Harald Schmalzbauer h.schmalzba...@omnilan.de
wrote:
schrieb Pete French am 29.08.2012 11:38 (localtime):
Link aggregation can never work with two separate switches! LACP and
static trunking require both sides to bundle the same trunk. which is
impossible for
On 08/28/2012 11:12 AM, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
Hi Giulio,
Just to clear things up:
igb0: 192.168.9.60/24
lagg0: 192.168.12.21/24
Yes.
Actually I notice now that the lagg0 address is different from what
I wrote below in my rc.conf (192.168.12.7). I've just made many test
with different
Hi Giulio,
Just to clear things up:
igb0: 192.168.9.60/24
lagg0: 192.168.12.21/24
What's the IP of the host you're trying ssh connections from ?
Also, just in case, did you enable any firewall ? (PF, ipfw)
On 27 August 2012 21:22, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org wrote:
Hi, thanks for
No answer, so it seems that link aggregation doesn't really work in freebsd,
this may help others with the same problem...
I used to use LCAP a lot - this was a few years ago, but the critical
point was that it only worked if all the cables went to the same
logcial switch. Using a pair of
Hi, thanks for the answer
Here is what you asked for:
# ifconfig igb0
igb0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST metric 0 mtu 1500
options=4401bbRXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO
ether ...
inet 192.168.9.60 netmask 0xff00
No answer, so it seems that link aggregation doesn't really work in freebsd,
this may help others with the same problem...
I reverted back to one link for management and one for service, and ssh
works as it should...
On 08/21/2012 11:18 PM, Giulio Ferro wrote:
Scenario : freebsd 9 stable
I'll get back to you regarding link aggregation when I'm done with groceries.
We use it here in production and it works flawlessly.
On 25 Aug 2012, at 09:54, Giulio Ferro au...@zirakzigil.org wrote:
No answer, so it seems that link aggregation doesn't really work in freebsd,
this may help
In the meantime kindly post:
Ifconfig for your igb0
Netstat -rn
Netstat -aln | grep 22
On 25 Aug 2012, at 13:18, Damien Fleuriot m...@my.gd wrote:
I'll get back to you regarding link aggregation when I'm done with groceries.
We use it here in production and it works flawlessly.
On
Scenario : freebsd 9 stable (yesterday) amd64 on HP server with 4 nic (igb)
1 nic is connected standalone to the management switch, the 3 other nics
are connected to a switch configured for aggregation.
If I configure the first nic (igb0) there is no problem, I can operate
as I normally do and
30 matches
Mail list logo
