Comments (10)
  • Add a Comment
  • Edit
  • More Actions v
  • Quarantine this Entry

1 AnthonyEnglish commented Permalink

Very helpful explanation, Nigel. The diagram is great, too. Incidentally, the entstat command can be run as padmin: entstat -all ent10 <div>&nbsp;</div> Load sharing seems a lot easier than multiple virtual switches with Network Interface Backup on every VM.

2 MarcoPolo commented Permalink

greet post, Nigel! Very educational! Thanks! But the question remains - what solution is ultimately the safest one? Is it a single or multiple switch solution. Forget what is easier to set up. What solution is the safer one? Could you elaborate, please? <div>&nbsp;</div> thanks, <div>&nbsp;</div> MarkD:-) <br />

3 KelleyCook commented Permalink

Ah ha <div>&nbsp;</div> This explains why I couldn't get it to work in our environment <div>&nbsp;</div> We have (in ha=auto mode) slot id 98: VLANS 1200, 1201, 1202, 1203, etc. <br /> And then a bunch of clients that connect to one of those VLANS <div>&nbsp;</div> It works wonderfully in production, but I couldn't convert it to sharing. (the VIO complained about needing more than one adapter) <br /> .... <div>&nbsp;</div> But it appears the key is that it is negotiating traffic at the virtual ethernet level (not quite the same as the VLAN level as advertised), so therefore you can't have a solitary Virtual ethernet adapter with multiple 802.1Q VLANs on each VIOs, but you I'll need to create a bunch of virtual ethernets with each of the individual VLANs. <div>&nbsp;</div> Thanks

4 campbelliain commented Permalink

Is the algorithm that decides which VIO serves which VLAN determinate? ie can I predict which VIO will serve which VLAN? This matters to me if the physical bandwidth available to each VIO is not the same ....

5 Sibi commented Permalink

Hi Nigel, <div>&nbsp;</div> Really helpful as usual...As mentioned by MarcoPolo can you throw some light on the comparioson of this SEA load sharing method with the other option virtual switch. We are currently working on ISDM cloud solution design stage and need to choose the best option. <div>&nbsp;</div>

6 atelloa commented Permalink

Hi Nigel, thanks for the excelent document. Im trying to implement it but im having some issue and i not found any workaround. <div>&nbsp;</div> $ chdev -dev ent19 -attr ha_mode=sharing <div>&nbsp;</div> Some error messages may contain invalid information <br /> for the Virtual I/O Server environment. <div>&nbsp;</div> Method error (/usr/lib/methods/chgsea): <br /> 0514-018 The values specified for the following attributes <br /> are not valid: <br /> ha_mode. Insufficient no. of adapters. <div>&nbsp;</div> do you have any idea?

7 HariNair commented Permalink

Hi Nigel, <div>&nbsp;</div> Very good information. Thanks. Just want to mention. I assume this is a typo "mkvdev -sea ent0 -vadapter ent3,ent4,ent5, ent6 -default ent3 -defaultid=10 -attr ha_mode=auto ctl_chan=ent42" <div>&nbsp;</div> ctl_cha should be ent9 according to the diagram <div>&nbsp;</div> Regards <br /> Hari Nair

8 Rkhaleel commented Permalink

If I have 10 VLANS to bridge then do I use 2 trunk adapters and put 5 vlans on each or use 10 trunk adapters 1 for each vlan. What is the optimal solution for load sharing. I just don't want to have additional virtual adapters If I don't really need them. <div>&nbsp;</div> Thanks in advance

9 woofer commented Permalink

Hi, Nigel <div>&nbsp;</div> In looking at both the top and bottom network diagrams, you appear to have VLAN tags 10, 11, 12 and 13 on the various clients. However, the screen shot showing the Virtual Ethernet Adapter Properties does not have the box checked for IEEE Settings and no additional VLANs being configured. Am I missing something here? Thanks!

10 nagger commented Permalink

About the IEEE needing to be set in the Properties screen capture.Yes, you are probably correct. I not longer have this setup to double check.