Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 09:46:02 -0700 From: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> To: tlambert2@mindspring.com Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, "Eugene L. Vorokov" <vel@bugz.infotecs.ru>, Soren Kristensen <soren@soekris.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why two cards on the same segment... Message-ID: <20010727164602.46DBC380B@overcee.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3B610E69.74C105AB@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote: > Peter Wemm wrote: > > Terry Lambert wrote: > > [..] > > > > > At a guess, he's attempting to implement VRRP, which requires > > > that the virtual interface have a differen MAC address, > > > > Dont guess, ask. > > He said he needed it for testing. > > Personally, I need it for VRRP, and to compete with NT, which > tests file server configurations with 4 cards with interrupts > vectored, one each, to each of 4 CPUs, and tends to kick both > Linux and FreeBSD's butts. Have you seen Bill Paul's FEC stuff? It works very nicely, but using the cisco Fast EtherChannel instead of VRRP. While it isn't the same, we have used it with four interfaces merged into one virtual interface quite happily. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010727164602.46DBC380B>