I created me a vif interface made up of four 100Mb Ethernet interfaces.
Seems to kick butt..again, too easy.
I see, that only the first two interfaces really do anything, the second two show no errors, but dont DO anything.
--- ratbert> netstat -i Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs Collis Queue f2 4352 10.16.2/24 ratbert.wil 4106473 0 3683613 0 0 0 e1a 1500 151.142.223 tulsnae0.wc 15529776 0 48689576 5 0 0 e1b 1500 151.142.223 tulsnae0.wc 19535884 0 57094960 5 0 0 e1c 1500 151.142.223 tulsnae0.wc 92 0 19 0 0 0 e1d 1500 151.142.223 tulsnae0.wc 1534 0 13 0 0 0 lo 1536 127 localhost.w 0 0 0 0 0 0 ratbert> ---
Is this normal? Thanks.
On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Mohler, Jeff wrote:
I created me a vif interface made up of four 100Mb Ethernet interfaces.
Seems to kick butt..again, too easy.
Same here; the setup was amazingly easy. Thanks, NetApp!
We even booted the filer once with 3/4 links, and it had no issues. Clicked the fourth cable in tight, and the filer detected and started using it within seconds. Kewl.
Our networking dude said the switch won't *evenly* load balance between all four trunks when I asked the same question of him the night we created the vif. Since I don't know squat about that, I just have to believe him.
Here's our output, for comparison. Seems to be a little more evenly distributed than yours, but e3a takes the lead by far.
bat> netstat -i Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs Collis Queue e0* 1500 none none 0 0 0 0 0 0 e3a 1500 144.212 bat 935492178 17 1070359540 268973 0 0 e3b 1500 144.212 bat 712967233 17 800877896 233521 0 0 e3c 1500 144.212 bat 527507321 2 669191765 212388 0 0 e3d 1500 144.212 bat 522712811 89 672437298 201463 0 0 lo 1536 127 localhost 30198 0 30198 0 0 0
Until next time...
Todd C. Merrill The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7792 24 Prime Park Way, Natick, MA 01760-1500 508-647-7012 FAX tmerrill@mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---
-
Mohler, Jeff -
Todd C. Merrill