kls@netapp.com (Karl Swartz) writes:
On the other hand, there probably are a lot of customers who would rather have failover *now* even if it only works with 100base-TX or FDDI (or requires extra GbE NICs). If we told a FDDI customer that we'd be able to give them failover today but we won't because we've not finished a driver for a GbE NIC that can handle multiple MAC addresses, they'd probably be a bit peeved.
I agree about "failover *now*". FDDI -- isn't it dead yet? ;-)
So, your options at the moment are (a) use GbE but not have failover (b) use failover but not GbE (c) buy a second GbE NIC and have both failover and and GbE (d) wait until we have a GbE NIC and driver which will allow you to have failover with a single GbE
What about GbE and failover to non-GbE (fast ethernet)?
Just to make sure, does failover require EtherChannel?
- Dan