Re: interface bonding
From: Vlad Galu (dudu_at_diaspar.rdsnet.ro)
Date: 12/22/03
- Previous message: Richard Bejtlich: "Re: interface bonding"
- In reply to: Richard Bejtlich: "Re: interface bonding"
- Next in thread: Ruslan Ermilov: "Re: interface bonding"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:52:31 +0200 To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Richard Bejtlich <richard_bejtlich@yahoo.com> writes:
|Thanks to Dmitry's tip on ng_eiface, I'm happy to
|report using the following configuration to bond
|interfaces with ng_one2many and a virtual interface
|ngeth0.
|
Thanks for the tip. I have one question, though. Is the throughtput of
the ngeth0 interface equal to the sum of the throughtput on each
physical interface ? During my tests with ng_fec I noticed that the
setup was only capable of failover; it only transferred frames on one
interface. If the interface went down for some reason, it switched to
the other one.
---- If it's there, and you can see it, it's real. If it's not there, and you can see it, it's virtual. If it's there, and you can't see it, it's transparent. If it's not there, and you can't see it, you erased it.
- application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
- Previous message: Richard Bejtlich: "Re: interface bonding"
- In reply to: Richard Bejtlich: "Re: interface bonding"
- Next in thread: Ruslan Ermilov: "Re: interface bonding"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|