VMware vnetworking NIC组合和故障转移建议

Joshodgers
秩
Userlevel 1
徽章 +11
以下显示了VSPHERE 5.5中当前可用的可用负载式平板选项以及针对虚拟分布式开关（VDS）和虚拟标准开关（VSS）的Nutanix环境的建议配置。



NIC团队和故障转移建议

乔什·奥格斯（Josh Odgers）
该主题已关闭以供评论

6个答复

t
UserLevel 2
徽章 +14
我们在VDS 5.5上使用增强的LACP在我们的NX6220上的两个GIG端口上创建一个滞后。您会推荐这种配置吗？如果是这样，您将推荐什么作为平衡滞后界面负载的最佳算法？我相信我们目前正在源IP模式下运行。
Joshodgers
秩
Userlevel 1
徽章 +11
随着VSPhere 4.0虚拟分布式开关的引入基于负载的团队（LBT），我认为在我认为NIC团队和负载平衡平衡的其他形式的要求中几乎被淘汰了，这就是为什么在发布我们的VNetwork最佳实践时，这就是为什么包括我自己在内的许多VCDX总结为LBT（BPG中的选项1）应该是我们的建议。

LBT非常好，包括：

1.简单

对开关类型或配置无依赖。LBT和多个VLAN支持所需的全部所需的星德访问点。

无需设计IP地址范围围绕IP哈希的设计范围以确保IPS的哈希确保流量平衡。

2.性能

LBT检测到> = 75％的NIC利用率，并实时在可用的NIC上动态加载余额VM。

3. LBT与“链接状态”故障转移策略一起工作

在故障转移和故障，链接状态和（如果受物理开关的支持）中，“链接状态跟踪”没有复杂性，请确保在链接故障时，将自动管理所有内容。

总之

我认为，在非常有限的情况下，LACP充其量会提供最小的收益。基于物理NIC负载（LBT）设置的路线可确保在使用VMNIC> 75％的情况下，流量将动态扩展到其他可用的适配器上。由于并不是真正需要这样的LACP，而且对于多个10GB连接，我还没有看到网络所需的环境（真正）需要解决的瓶颈。

如果有瓶颈，则基于物理NIC负载与NIOC结合使用的路线将是一个绝佳的解决方案，而无需LACP的复杂性。

这是我们完整BPG的链接：http://go.nutanix.com/techguide-nutanix-vmwarevspherenetworkingonnutanix_lp.html
乔什·奥格斯（Josh Odgers）
\n
\nThere are many reasons LBT is excellent including:
\n
\n1. Simplicity
\n
\nNo dependancy on the switch type or configuration. Stardard Access points with 802.1q is all that is required for LBT and multiple VLAN support.
\n
\nNo requirement to design IP address ranges around IP Hash to ensure the hash from the IPs ensures a balance of traffic.
\n
\n2. Performance
\n
\nLBT detects NIC utilization of >=75% and dynamically load balances VMs across the available NICs in real time.
\n
\n3. LBT works with \"Link Status\" failover policy
\n
\nNo complexity with failover and failback, Link Status and (if supported by physical switch) \"Link State Tracking\" ensure in the event of a link failure, everything is managed automatically.
\n
\nIn Summary
\n
\nIn my opinion, LACP would at best provide a minimal benefit under very limited circumstances. The route based on physical NIC load (LBT) setting ensures in the event of >75% utilization of a vmNIC that traffic will be dynamically spread over the other available adapters. As such LACP is not really required, and with multiple 10Gb connections I have not seen an environment where the network was (truly) a bottleneck that needed to be addressed.
\n
\nIf there was a bottleneck, Route based on physical NIC load combined with NIOC would be a excellent solution without the need for the complexity of LACP.
\n
\nHere is a link to our full BPG: http:\/\/go.nutanix.com\/TechGuide-Nutanix-VMwarevSphereNetworkingonNutanix_LP.html<\/a>","quoteUsername":"joshodgers","translations":{"Common":{"like":"Like","unlike":"Unlike"},"Forum":{"Quote":"Quote","Share":"Share"}}}">
t
UserLevel 2
徽章 +14
非常彻底的解释 - 谢谢！我们将LACP作为以前的刀片技术的自然发展，我们可能会考虑随着我们的群集的发展而迁移到基于负载的团队。
一个
徽章 +4
可靠的信息 -

我假设您在该特定端口组中使用A/A端口。我的问题是，为什么故障设置设置为否？根据我的经验，我一直与网络团队配置或合作，以在上行链路端口上使用Portfast利用RSTP。

我在他的博客上也看到了一些有关此事的信息（带有VMKERNEL连接的MGMT端口组），好奇为什么这是选择的配置。
\n
\nI am assuming you are using A\/A ports in that particular port group. My question is why is the setting for failback set to no? In my experience I have always configured or worked with the network team to leverage RSTP with Portfast on the uplink ports.
\n
\nI saw \ufeff mention something on his blog as well about this (with the vmkernel connected mgmt port group), curious why this is the configuration of choice.","quoteUsername":"adamlw","translations":{"Common":{"like":"Like","unlike":"Unlike"},"Forum":{"Quote":"Quote","Share":"Share"}}}">
C
徽章 +5
遇到了这个线程，因为我们正在准备一个全新的集群，我们将很快投入生产。是否建议所有端口组（IE Management，CVM，VM）的设置？会欣赏任何见解。
m
我们还使用LACP，快速作为我们的标准，因为我们必须支持对用户的透明失败。
与LACP相反，我们可以期望LBT的收敛速度是多少？

谢谢，
\r\nWhat speeds of convergence can we expect from LBT as opposed to LACP?
\r\n
\r\nthanks,","quoteUsername":"mike.fintak","translations":{"Common":{"like":"Like","unlike":"Unlike"},"Forum":{"Quote":"Quote","Share":"Share"}}}">
条款和条件
Learn more about our cookies.<\/a>","cookiepolicy.button":"Accept cookies","cookiepolicy.button.deny":"Deny all","cookiepolicy.link":"Cookie settings","cookiepolicy.modal.title":"Cookie settings","cookiepolicy.modal.content":"We use 3 different kinds of cookies. You can choose which cookies you want to accept. We need basic cookies to make this site work, therefore these are the minimum you can select. Learn more about our cookies.<\/a>","cookiepolicy.modal.level1":"Basic
Functional","cookiepolicy.modal.level2":"Normal
Functional + analytics","cookiepolicy.modal.level3":"Complete
Functional + analytics + social media + embedded videos"}}}">
Baidu