Re: Multipath route

[wk <witold.kowolik@xxxxxxxxxx>]

jose nuno neto pisze:
> > jose nuno neto pisze:
> > > GoodMornings
> > > Thanks for your input
> > > Im looking for redundancy but a little extra:
> > >
> > > I have already bonding
> > >
> > > bond0 :- eth0 + eth1
> > > bond1 :- eth2 + eth3
> > >
> > > And I have a IP witch I can reach from the 2Lans
> > > Its a ILOM IP that I use for PowerFencing on a cluster setup
> > > Since I have the paths I thought I could use them to get extra
> > > reliability
> > > Thats why I went into this iproute thing...
> > >
> > > BestRegards
> > > Jose
> > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: linux-net-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > [mailto:linux-net-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of wk
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 4:56 AM
> > > > > To: linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: Multipath route
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > Some time ago we were faced with a problem with multiple network
> > > > > interfaces in the same subnetwork.
> > > > > We would like to use several NIC's with IP addresses from the same
> > > > > subnetwork with link redundancy functionality.
> > > > If link redundancy is what you are after, you might want to consider
> > > > Ethernet bonding as an alternative. Instead of several network
> > > > interfaces
> > > > each with its own IP address, you get a single virtual interface that
> > > > you
> > > > assign addresses to and the physical interfaces become slaves to that
> > > > virtual interface. The bonding code switches the active interface when
> > > > the
> > > > current active interface's link goes down.
> > > >
> > > > See linux/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt in your kernel source
> > > > tree.
> > > >
> > > > Note there were at one time issues with using IPv6 over bonded
> > > > interfaces.
> > > > I don't know if they have been addressed in newer kernel versions, but
> > > > for
> > > > IPv4 it seems to work fine. Brocade has used it on some of its SAN
> > > > products for a few years now.
> > Jose,
> >
> > Could you try to apply the patch I've sent yesterday and tell us if it
> > works for you?
> >
> > This patch can be applied against 2.6.33 kernel and probably earlier
> > kernel versions, although I tested it only on 2.6.33.
>
> Im running a RedHat 2.6.18-164.2.1.el5 and it supposed to be supported by
> the Redhat after, so think I cannot patch the kernel....
> But from your previous post, it seems to do what I wanned, I cant have
> that behavior from non patched kernel?

Jose,

To be honest it's hard to say because I have no opportunity (and also 
time) to check this on RedHat 2.6.18-164.2.1.el5 kernel.

A quick advice:
as I remember the *vanilla* 2.6.18 kernel has support for more than one 
algorithm of selecting paths:

- round-robin
- random
- wrandom
- drr

but I don't know if they are in RedHat 2.6.18-164.2.1.el5 kernel.
If yes - maybe you can try to use one of them?


What about the RedHat support?
Maybe they will help you?


regards,
WK

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html