We take advantage of this when we don't have enough network connectivity to ensure proper redunancy, but still use ifgrps whenever possible. It makes the load balancing less involved- if you use failover groups, you need to try and spread your LIFs around, but if you have an ifgrp, you just tie together all the physical interfaces and then make all your LIFs' home there.

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Martin <martin@leggatt.me.uk> wrote:

Interesting thread....

A peer suggested recently that in cDOT failover groups could be used instead
of ifgrps for availability. It was suggested as it simplifies the
configuration (don't have ifgrps and failover groups) and means a LIF can
failover to any port in the cluster (depending on type of LIF of course)
rather than just the ports on the node.

Not considering throughput has anyone else heard of or considered this
configuration?

Thanks
Martin





--
View this message in context: http://network-appliance-toasters.10978.n7.nabble.com/FAS8040-network-configuration-in-CDOT-tp26483p26498.html
Sent from the Network Appliance - Toasters mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
Toasters mailing list
Toasters@teaparty.net
http://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters

_______________________________________________
Toasters mailing list
Toasters@teaparty.net
http://www.teaparty.net/mailman/listinfo/toasters