From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 12 10:55:56 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99653106564A for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:55:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@kuzbass.ru) Received: from www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (www.svzserv.kemerovo.su [213.184.65.80]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE558FC13 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:55:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@kuzbass.ru) Received: from www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (eugen@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7CAtqn5090007; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:55:52 +0800 (KRAST) (envelope-from eugen@www.svzserv.kemerovo.su) Received: (from eugen@localhost) by www.svzserv.kemerovo.su (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id m7CAtqJJ090006; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:55:52 +0800 (KRAST) (envelope-from eugen) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:55:52 +0800 From: Eugene Grosbein To: Marian Hettwer Message-ID: <20080812105552.GA89695@svzserv.kemerovo.su> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: lagg(4) and failover X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:55:56 -0000 On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Marian Hettwer wrote: > I'm using lagg(4) on some of our servers and I'm just wondering how the > failover is implemented. > The manpage isn't quite clear: > > failover Sends and receives traffic only through the master port. > If > the master port becomes unavailable, the next active port > is > used. The first interface added is the master port; any > interfaces added after that are used as failover devices. > > What is meant by "becomes unavailable"? Is it just the physical link which > needs to become unavailable to trigger a failover? Yes. It seems you need lacp protocol described later in the manual. Eugene Grosbein