Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 12:06:53 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Damien Fleuriot <ml@my.gd> Cc: "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: link aggregation - bundling 2 lagg interfaces together Message-ID: <20110204180653.GA75479@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <4D4BED80.5060806@my.gd> References: <4D4BED80.5060806@my.gd>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Feb 04), Damien Fleuriot said: > I have a firewall with 2x Intel pro dual port cards. > > On Intel A , port 1 goes to switch 1, port 2 goes to switch 2 > On Intel B , port 1 goes to switch 1, port 2 goes to switch 2 > > I have created the following 2 lagg devices using LACP: > > lagg0 = A1 + B1 > lagg1 = A2 + B2 > > This works fine. > > Now, what I had in mind was creating a lagg2 device using lagg0 and > lagg1 with failover. > > That would provide redundancy in case of a switch failure. > > ifconfig won't let me though: > > # ifconfig lagg2 laggproto failover laggport lagg0 laggport lagg1 > ifconfig: SIOCSLAGGPORT: Invalid argument > > I suppose it's not possible to aggregate lagg interfaces ? Apparently not: http://fxr.watson.org/fxr/source/net/if_lagg.c#L516 It looks like there is preliminary code under #ifdef LAGG_PORT_STACKING, but it claims to be untested. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110204180653.GA75479>