topic RE: EAPS and Load Sharing in ExtremeSwitching (EXOS/Switch Engine)

EAPS and Load Sharing

Mrxlazuardin — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 02:36:00 GMT

Hi,

I want to double my ring bandwidth between one BD8800 and two X460. Which one is the best, using EAPS over load sharing ports (ex. LACP) or use multiple domain rings with different ways (clockwise and conter clockwise)?

Best regards,

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul_Russo — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 08:19:00 GMT

Hello Lazuardi I would create a LAG connection between the two switches over that link. Thanks P

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul11 — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 08:19:00 GMT

Hi Paul ,

Could you explain more about LAG connection please? basic setup, configuration and possible outcome? Thanks.

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul_Russo — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 08:19:00 GMT

Hello Linn the LAG is what we call sharing it is created using the command enable sharing Grouping algorithm address LACP You can either set the group as static which means it will not use LACP or add LACP where the two sides communicate to establish the LAG group. The effect is that you share the load over all of the links in the LAG. It will not be balanced because the traffic is sent over a particular port based on the hash and is flow based. So for example if I have two flows one can be a ping and the other can be a TFTP connection. They can be assigned to two different ports but the data I'll not be the same. Hope that helps

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul11 — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 08:19:00 GMT

Utilization is high on Link 1 only. I want to use load balance on both links.
Please kindly see the below output and advice thanks.

* I try L2 static, L3_L4 and LACP. all the same. Ports are not load balance. *

enable sharing 1 grouping 1,4

enable sharing 1 grouping 1,4 L3_L4

enable sharing 1 grouping 1,4 algorithm address-based L3_L4 lacp

CoreSW # sh port 1,4 utilization bandwithPort Link Link Rx Peak Rx Tx Peak Tx
State Speed % bandwidth % bandwidth % bandwidth % bandwidth
================================================================================
Link_1> A 1000 82.06 94.94 48.23 55.72
Link_2> A 1000 0.25 0.30 1.34 1.57
================================================================================
> indicates Port Display Name truncated past 8 characters
Link State: A-Active, R-Ready, NP-Port Not Present, L-Loopback

Please help me how to load balance these two links together. Thanks sir.

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul_Russo — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 08:19:00 GMT

Hey Lazuardi

you will not get a perfect load balance. that is why it is called sharing or link aggregation versus load balanced. It all depends on how the addresses are hashed. I see you are using L3 and L4 which should hash based on src and dst IP and IP port number. How much traffic are you providing across the link? is this production or in a lab?

Thanks
P

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul11 — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 08:19:00 GMT

Hi Paul Russo,

It is in Production live network. Please advice how to load share on two links.
Really appreciate your help and thanks for your time.

We do need your advice.

Thanks sir.

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul_Russo — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 08:19:00 GMT

Hey Lazuardi

You can change the CRC to customize the hash. The command is

"configure sharing address-based custom"
"configure sharing address-based custom [ipv4 [L3-and-L4 | source-only |"
"destination-only | source-and-destination] | hash-algorithm [xor | crc-16 |"
"crc-32 [lower | upper]]]"

I would recommend calling GTAC to help set this up to make sure that everything is set up properly.

P

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

PARTHIBAN_CHINN — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 09:12:00 GMT

IF there are more number of switches then can go for EAPS and other solutions

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Mrxlazuardin — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 18:47:00 GMT

Now i'm trying EAPS over LACP. Any drawbacks I should know of this method? Why this method is better than using multiple domain rings with different ways?

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul_Russo — Sun, 30 Nov 2014 19:46:00 GMT

Hello Lazuardi. You can do Another EAPS ring but that won't add bandwidth per SE because you are still using the same ports tx/rx just sending the traffic in a different direction. It is a solution if you want to use all of the links of the ring since you can change the blocked port. Using a LAG actually adds more bandwidth to the existing ring allowing you to keep the VLANs in tact and you can add them with usually no impact to the traffic, however, I do recommend adding them in off hours. If you do two separate rings with two different domains you will have to make sure they are separate and connect them with just one link or route between them on one switch so you don't have a loop. I hope that helps. P

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Mrxlazuardin — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 10:06:00 GMT

Hi Paul,

Do you mean that I cannot have the same protected VLANs on all ring domains of the same devices?

Best regards,

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul_Russo — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 18:27:00 GMT

Hey Lazuadri Yes a VLAN can only be one one domain if they share the same physical ring. if you are using spatial-reuse on EAPS, where one domain goes one direction and the other domain goes in the other direction you have to divide the VLANs in half where half are on one domain and the other half on the other domain. P

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Mrxlazuardin — Fri, 05 Dec 2014 08:13:00 GMT

Hi Paul,

Any specific reason of selecting L3_L4 or CRC algorithms? What is default default hashing algorithm for LACP?

Best regards,

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul_Russo — Fri, 05 Dec 2014 08:18:00 GMT

Hey Lazar do the default is crc16 I believe. Changing it to crc32 may help but I would recommend testing it if you can. P

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul_Russo — Mon, 08 Dec 2014 21:33:00 GMT

Hey Lazuardi

I if you just use LACP the algorithm is L2. The reason to use L3-L4 is to get more info to hash off of which should get a better spread of traffic. If you use CRC32 verses CRC16 the that should help as well.

Thanks
P

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Mrxlazuardin — Mon, 08 Dec 2014 21:54:00 GMT

Hi Paul,

In your opinion, which one is better for spreading, L3_L4, CRC16 or CRC32? Any license required for custom CRC16 and CRC32 sharing hash, especially for X460?

Best regards,

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

PARTHIBAN_CHINN — Mon, 08 Dec 2014 23:08:00 GMT

License is not required Try both and save the best one

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Mrxlazuardin — Tue, 09 Dec 2014 00:03:00 GMT

Hi,

Will CRC16 and CRC32 give more ethernet farmes reordering overhead than L3_L4?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation

Best regards,

RE: EAPS and Load Sharing

Paul11 — Tue, 09 Dec 2014 08:14:00 GMT

Hi,

I try this command and not supported in XOS 15.3.3.5 model X450a-24x.

"configure sharing address-based custom"

Is there any way to change the CRC to customize the hash for X450a-24x? Thanks.

BRgds,