Re: How usable is agr(4)?

[Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 01:43:00PM +0200, Hauke Fath wrote:
> All,
>
> while upgrading a busy nfs fileserver, I have changed it to aggregate  
> two wm(4) GBit interfaces with agr(4); on the other end is a HP procurve 
> 2848 switch.
>
> After a few days, a 'netstat -i' gives me
>
> Name  Mtu   Network       Address              Ipkts Ierrs    Opkts Oerrs 
> Colls
> wm0   1500  <Link>        00:30:48:d7:0a:78 349626955    23 338123451 0   
>   0
> wm1   1500  <Link>        00:30:48:d7:0a:79     7958     0     7955     0     > 0
> agr0  1500  <Link>        00:30:48:d7:0a:78 349620694    16 338117217  
> 3516     2
>
> which is not really balanced. Is this what I should expect? Or what am I 
> missing?

The balance is done based on a hash of the source and destination
MAC addresses. So if your traffic is going though a router, you won't have
load-balancing. If the clients are local (and there's enough of them)
I would expect it to work.

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer%antioche.eu.org@localhost>
     NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--