That was my first thought, but one of the two NICs doesn't seem to support that properly. I got the bond (without the bridge) up and running, but the additional (cheap) NIC wasn't used at all (I monitored the traffic via gkrellm). Pulling the plug out of the internal NIC resulted in the total loss of connectivity. That's not supposed to happen with a bond. I would have thought that the other NIC, in that case the additional one, would still provide network connection, albeit with reduced bandwidth. Anyway, the proposal from Dietmar works perfectly now. Thomas Mueller schrieb: > >> Now I thought it was possible to create to of those bridges, each one >> with one physical NIC. Then I could assign two virtual machines to each >> bridge/NIC in order to balance or distribute the load. > > if you just want load balancing/distribute the load on the two NIC's: why > dont you create a bond (some people/manufacturers call it also "trunk" > or "LAG" ) out of physical NIC's and then bridge the bond? > > http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt > http://www.debianhelp.co.uk/bonding.htm > > - Thomas > > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge mailing list > Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
