This website uses cookies. By clicking Accept, you consent to the use of cookies. Click Here to learn more about how we use cookies.
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
- Extreme Networks
- Community List
- Wireless
- ExtremeWireless (WiNG)
- RFS7000 Multi-link trunk - load balance
Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
RFS7000 Multi-link trunk - load balance
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-28-2020 05:55 AM
Hi
We have two RFS7K - currently it is set to tunnel , so all wifi traffic comes back to the controller, is it possible to channel bond or create an MLT into the network stack so the throughput is increased
There is only one port connected on the RFS which is GE1
Solved! Go to Solution.
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-29-2020 08:22 AM
Hello Phil,
Load balancing strategy depends on traffic profile. In case of single default gateway in particular VLAN - mac method should be relevant. The idea here is to keep a single flow path unchanged.
Regarding balancing RFS units - please keep in mind that tunneled VLANs is anyway balanced in the cluster by default - i.e. half of VLANs are bridged on every cluster node (in your case). This apparently means that user traffic also tunneled between nodes to reach the target bridge or DIS depending on there AP adoption tunnel landed (please see “sh mint dis detail”). This basically means that communication between nodes is also important and should be effectively organised. Like using mentioned stack of switches.
Stack is totally good as long as it appear as a single unit and support LACP
port-channel load-balance src-dst-?
src-dst-ip Source and Destination IP address based load balancing
src-dst-mac Source and Destination Mac address based load balancing
Regards,
Misha
11 REPLIES 11
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-04-2020 01:05 PM
I have created the LACP on the Nortel units and done the
self
interface port-channel 1
port-channel load-balance src-dst-IP
switchport mode trunk
switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,10-11
interface ge 1
channel-group 1
interface ge 2
channel-group 1
But the network didn’t like it, is the above for when in locally bridge mode only ?
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-04-2020 08:01 AM
Hi Misha
this is the output from the RFS
rfs7000-Primary*#sh mint dis detail
1 vlan links on 70.81.BE.8E:
link vlan-1 at level 1, DIS 70.38.0A.F9, hello-interval 4, adj-hold-time 13
2 extended-vlans on 70.81.BE.8E:
extended-vlan 1, EVIS 70.38.0A.F9, extvlan-interval 4, evis-hold-time 13
extended-vlan 10, EVIS 70.81.BE.8E (self), extvlan-interval 4, evis-hold-time 13
rfs7000-Primary*#
I’m not sure if I should create the Load balance of the RFS first or set the LACP up on the Nortel 5520 first, Would it have an impact doing the RFS first ?
Phil
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-29-2020 02:58 PM
Hi Misha
we have VLAN’s, When I tried the flip from tunnelled to locally bridged it was applied to the AP profile, so I powered the AP’s off at the POE network switch, then 1 by 1 powered them on again so they would pick up the new profile, The network seemed to be unaffected by the flip, but MU’s could not get an IP, but they could / can when set to tunnelled. So with locally bridged they way understand is that the RFS / VX would become a policy enforcer for the AP’s, but if the controller ( RFS ) went offline it affects nothing except any new device that has not been setup
Phil
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
01-29-2020 02:46 PM
Hello,
Please be advised that having same set of VLANs accessible as tunneled and available on AP interface will create traffic loops. Keep in mind that tunneled VLAN is a regular bridge so AP will pick any broadcast frame that belongs to particular VLAN from it’s LAN trunk and send it back to controller.
And yes, since .11n distributed bridging considered as primary method keeping controller outside of traffic flow. Starting with .11ac access point are capable enough to perform also DPI onboard making controller-based firewalls useless. Nowadays controllers can be effectively used in following scenarios:
1. As a tunnel gateways as a part of corporate WAN infrastructure
2. Servicing tunneled hotspots - i.e. non-critical low-volume traffic
3. in a flat, legacy, rented LAN
4. When staff too lazy to provision VLANs
Misha
