[Linux-cluster] Packet loss after configuring Ethernet bonding

[Bill G.]

Hi Zaman,

There are some configurations that need to be made to the switch to allow
both nics to come up with the same mac. I am by no means a network expert,
so I cannot think of the name of the protocol off the top of my head. I am
willing to wager that the lack of that configuration is the cause of your
packet loss.
On Nov 9, 2012 8:22 PM, "Zama Ques" <queszama at yahoo.in> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Digimer <lists at alteeve.ca>
> To: Zama Ques <queszama at yahoo.in>; linux clustering <
> linux-cluster at redhat.com>
> Cc:
> Sent: Saturday, 10 November 2012 8:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Packet loss after configuring Ethernet bonding
>
> On 11/09/2012 09:26 PM, Zama Ques wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Need help on resolving a issue related to implementing High Availability
> at network level . I understand that this is not the right forum to ask
> this question , but since it is related to HA and Linux , I am asking here
> and I feel somebody here  will have answer to the issues I am facing .
> >
> > I am trying to implement Ethernet Bonding , Both the interface in my
> server are connected to two different network switches .
> >
> > My configuration is as follows:
> >
> > ========
> > # cat /proc/net/bonding/bond0
> >
> > Ethernet Channel Bonding Driver: v3.6.0 (September 26, 2009)
> >
> > Bonding Mode: adaptive load balancing Primary Slave: None Currently
> > Active Slave: eth0 MII Status: up MII Polling Interval (ms): 0 Up Delay
> > (ms): 0 Down Delay (ms): 0
> >
> > Slave Interface: eth0 MII Status: up Speed: 1000 Mbps Duplex: full Link
> > Failure Count: 0 Permanent HW addr: e4:e1:5b:d0:11:10 Slave queue ID: 0
> >
> > Slave Interface: eth1 MII Status: up Speed: 1000 Mbps Duplex: full Link
> > Failure Count: 0 Permanent HW addr: e4:e1:5b:d0:11:14 Slave queue ID: 0
> > ------------
> > # cat /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/mode
> >
> >   balance-alb 6
> >
> >
> > # cat /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/miimon
> >    0
> >
> > ============
> >
> >
> > The issue for me is that I am seeing packet loss after configuring
> bonding .  Tried connecting both the interface to the same switch , but
> still seeing the packet loss . Also , tried changing miimon value to 100 ,
> but still seeing the packet loss.
> >
> > What I am missing in the configuration ? Any help will be highly
> appreciated in resolving the problem .
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > Zaman
>
>  > You didn't share any details on your configuration, but I will assume
> > you are using corosync.
>
> > The only supported bonding mode is Active/Passive (mode=1). I've
> > personally tried all modes, out of curiosity, and all had problems. The
> > short of it is that if you need more that 1 gbit of performance, buy
> > faster cards.
>
> > If you are interested in what I use, it's documented here:
>
> >  https://alteeve.ca/w/2-Node_Red_Hat_KVM_Cluster_Tutorial#Network
>
> >  I've used this setup in several production clusters and have tested
> >  failure are recovery extensively. It's proven very stable. :)
>
>
> Thanks Digimer for the quick response and pointing me to the link . I am
> yet to reach cluster configuration , initially trying to  understand
> ethernet bonding before going into cluster configuration. So , option for
> me is only to use Active/Passive bonding mode in case of clustered
> environment.
> Few more clarifications needed , Can we use other bonding modes in non
> clustered environment .  I am seeing packet loss in other modes . Also ,
> the support of  using only mode=1 in cluster environment is it a
> restriction of RHEL Cluster suite or it is by design .
>
> Will be great if you clarify these queries .
>
> Thanks in Advance
> Zaman
>
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20121109/5e805e9f/attachment.htm>