On Wed, 2004-08-11 at 17:36, Michael Rubin wrote: > I just set up a round-robin ethernet bond with 2 nics, it seems to be > working (both cards sending and receiving). /proc/net/bonding/bond0 gives > the proper hardware addresses for eth0 and eth1 (from > /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-ethX I assume, where the hardware > addresses are set correctly), however, /sbin/ifconfig displays the same > hardware address for bond0, eth0 and eth1 (eth0's). Should I be worried > that the hardware address for eth1 is displayed incorrectly, or is that just > a side-effect of the bond? It's a side-effect of the bond, no need to worry. > On a side note, the RX & TX numbers (from /sbin/ifconfig) for eth0 and eth1 > seem to be somewhat unbalanced (eth1 receiving 5 times as much as eth0, TX > is exactly the same for both). Is that a switch configuration issue or a > server configuration issue? I recently setup bonding as well, so I'm not sure. Incoming packets seem to favor one interface here as well, outgoing are nearly the same. My theory at this point is that incoming traffic is only using one interface (via round-robin) while outgoing traffic uses both. I need to re-read the bonding documentation again to see if it provides any more details. What kind of switches do you have and how are they configured? I have some older Cisco 3500-XL's here, configured for port grouping. What's mildly entertaining is pulling the plug on one of the cables without interrupting the data flow. ;-) You'll see messages to that effect in /var/log/messages and /proc/net/bonding/bond0 will increment the failure count. -Eric -- Eric Sisler <esisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Library Applications Specialist Westminster Public Library Westminster, CO USA Linux - Don't fear the Penguin. Want to know what we use Linux for? Visit http://gromit.westminster.lib.co.us/linux -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
