IP hash load balancing

Similar Questions

• NIC teaming with the IP hash load balancing

  Hi guys

  I have a virtual machine with a VMXNET3 10 Gbps. It is usually have a heavy traffic with a special server and saturate one of my two physical NIC of 1 Gbps in its PortGroup. I want to know what's going to happen if I turn on "NIC Teaming for this portgroup with basic IP hash load balancing". In my case the source IP address and destination are not change so the aggregates of traffic between my two physical network adapters?

  To avoid saturating completely the two 1GbE NIC, it can also be useful to look in charge based on the grouping and the NIOC. It will ensure that the other streams of traffic VM are not crushed by this machine a virtual when it saturates a network card. The disadvantage is that it requires Enterprise Plus licenses (using a dvSwitch).

• Fresh CPU overhead on the IP hash load balancing?

  I read VMware which are disadvantages of IP increased CPU load hash load balancing option memory in the host.

  Who would come to have to do a part of the source IP address and destination of each frame to know what link to put the framework on a hash. This won't be necessary on the Port or MAC based, since this is "hard coded" by VM.

  My question is, what is this overload of the processor? On a fairly modern processor, these calculations would be noticeable, as in less time available for the guests of computer virtual CPU?

  I'm not looking for an exact answer as in ' it takes 2.9 percent of time cpu ", exactly what are your experiences?

  If you do not run your ESX with 80 + % CPU load then overhaed is negligible.

  ---

  MCSA, MCTS Hyper-V, VCP 3/4, VMware vExpert

  http://blog.vadmin.ru

• Lighthouse of unusable probing with the IP hash load balancing.

  I read this in one Web site, but I would like to know the reason for this?

  Is it because the IP hash uses IP source and destination to select the path and so for the markup, it can only detect the failure of the link for one of the trajectory of two?

  Is there some user guide of VMware or documentation that talks about what I can read on this subject?

  Thank you and have a nice week,

  Anthony.

  Please take a look at http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1012819 and the links provided in this KB. This explains why probe headlight does not work with EtherChannel.

  André

• The order of failover and load balancing

  Hello

  I have the following scenario. An ESXi with 4 Gbps vmnic. The questions are:

  (1) if I have a group of ports configured for 'Route based on the original virtual Port code' in the policy of balancing load, and for the same port group I the option button 'Override switch failover command"checked, where I set up 3 of the active adapters vmnic, as well as the other vmic remaining as unused adapter, the ESXi uses the policy that I have configured (in this case 'Route based on the original port code') between the three vmnic load balancing marked as active? Or he uses them in the order that they appear in the section active cards?

  (2) Suppossed, I configured the four physical switch ports in an etherchannel group to use 'Route based on the IP hash' load balancing policy. In this situation, then I configured for a certain group of port to only used two active adapters and two others as unused? In this case, ESXi should balance the load using the method hash IP but only in two active adapters? Or it is a misconfigiuration and I should not configure my nic teaming in this way?

  (3) the official setup guide says "NOTICE on IP requires the physical switch be configured with etherchannel. For all other options, etherchannel must be disabled. ». How can I I configured my virtual network, if I have a few groups of political ports based on the hash of the IP to use load balancing and another uses 'Route based on the original port code. This is the case when I for example have two management ports using the same vSwitch with four vmnic (where they are configured as an Etherchannel in the physical switch). I would port one or several groups for virtual machines that use the IP of the hash method of balancing the load and vmkernel ports por management uses only a single adapter active with no back and as "based on the source port ID" load balancing as best practices said.

  Now, the four vmnic is the same for all traffic. The physical switch ports must be configured in an etherchannel group because certain groups of ports will use the method of IP hash, but others are not. The configuration guide I said SHOULD NOT use etherchannel if I won't use the hash IP method, but I'LL use it, but only in groups of one or more ports.

  Maybe I do not share the same vmnic from this situation.

  Finally, it's a philosophical question. What is the difference between 'The route based on the source port ID' and the 'road based on the source MAC Hash' load balancing policy? What is the purpose of the second? It is assumed that if I had two different MAC address in a virtual machine, it would be because I had two different virtual cards inside the virtual machine, which would be connected to two different port ID in the vSwitch, I can use the first strategy (based on the original port code). In other words, which would be the case where I had the traffic entering the same vSwitch but port ID with different source MAC address, so I should chose the method to distinguish the Source MAC address load balancing traffic?

  Thank you.

  Guido.

  (1) as long as you override vmnic only and don't change the policy for this group of ports, he uses the policy configured at level vSwitch and use the selected interface 3 with this policy

  (2) it should work, I don't think it's a problem for the switch receive packets on a subset of the aggregation. I do not think that Etherchannel is supported (IIRC, it is a Cisco proprietary protocol, VMware only supports LACP passive, which corresponds to the Port channel world Cisco.) Trouble me if I'm wrong!)

  (3) I think that's all right, as I have explained in 2), there is no special negotiations with the consolidation of VMware, the important thing only I know is to configure the port on the side of the switch channel if you decide to use the IP hash (that will lead to important questions)

  4) (self labeled) I think it may differ in some cases individuals, as when the operating system use the same MAC address for both NICs (aggregation in-vm) or if you advertise several MAC address for the same network card (ESX in a VM for example would make for its VM). Such cases differently affect this setting.

  That is the right question, and I'm curious to know if someone wants to develop on it!

• PIX / ASA - OSPF load balancing

  Hello

  I read the balance a route via OSPF equal cost load the PIX. It will send packages via per package, or is there another method for distibuting the traffic to the break following equal cost?

  Thank you!!

  Lee

  Hello Lawrence,.

  PIX 6.3 now supports the NLB using OSPF only (up to 3 default routes)

  The PIX can receive up to 3 doors by default (all the same metric) 3 different routes of entry, and

  balance the load on a per destination basis. Currently, there is no way the PIX to

  determine which carries a package will be sent to. You cannot currently use static routes

  for load balancing.

  The used hash algorithm is not simple, it is very difficult to determine which

  Route (next hop) a package will be given an IP Source and Destination pair. Basically,.

  the PIX takes the source and destination IPs (two 32-bit numbers) and axe in one

  16-bit unique number. Then the number of 16-bit (0x0000 - 0xFFFF) is divided into thirds.

  The first 1/3 goes to the door of entry 1, the next 1/3 goes to the door of entry 2, and the last 1/3 goes to

  Gateway 3.

  I hope this helps! If Yes, please rate.

  Thank you

• DSwitch load balancing

  I have DSwitch 5.5 in vsphere 6.0

  Two 5.5 esxi hosts to connect to these virtual switch of two network cards.

  NICs works in IP HASH (the real switch side cisco 3570 I did port channel). Everything works fine, but I have question.

  Can I do a load balancing for a single host examle: IP hash, on the other - on the virtual port original? If say, how? I can see only one setting for all VDswitch

  

  

  Can I do a load balancing for a single host examle: IP hash, on the other - on the virtual port original? If say, how? I can see only one setting for all VDswitch

  As you can see on your screenshots, settings are for port group and not overall overall dvSwitch. You can have different settings for each physical ESXi host though, all guests must use the same algorithm as specified by the port or load balancing groups. If you want different settings by physical ESXi hist, then you will need to use the local standard and undistributed vSwitches, but we can ask the question of whether such a potentially unpredictable and inconsistent configuration is desirable.

  On a side note, you can set up several groups of ports with different parameters on a vSwitch (d). However, mixture etherchannel/LAG/LACP IP - hash based load balancing with any other balancing as virtual port ID in the same uplink / vSwitch (d) is not supported.

  In addition, it is not sensible, your acts only physical switch as a single channel for all traffic and will not be able to differentiate as several ports on an ESXi host groups could do.

• Can we do vmotion between hosts with load balancing in network cards grouping different strategy.

  Hello

  We are implementin new host in our Infra and do some vmotions between different groups. A group a host with balancing 'route based on IP hash. " Can we do Vmotion to another cluster where the hosts have different load balancing policies. In addition, if we change the policy on new hosts in furture of load balancing is loss of downtime or a package?

  Kind regards

  Vikram Kumar

  First of all, no problem from VMs one ESX to another, they use different political Multipathing.

  Second, if you use IP hash, it means you are using etherchannel (or LACP) on the physical layer - configuration/cancellation of the configuration that almost always require that the uplinks are not used by any VMs, so you have time to synchronize the physical and virtual configuration. It is not a time out, but you need to plan accordingly - all depends on your physical network capacity.

• Adpaters/active with the vPort ID load balancing

  Looking at the following configuration, my understanding is that some virtual machines in this group of ports will use vmnic1 and some will use vmnic6 (based on their ID vport).  Pretty simple.

  Assume that the uplink different swithces cards.  This works because there is no tree blocking one of the unplinks.  Question is: what happens to traffic on vmnic6 if the link fails? (failure of the local liaison, NIC failure, etc. - I'm even not consider upstream failure here).  My understanding is that vmnic1 will not resume because the windows are related to the vmnic6.  Only if there is a Standby adapter is there a link to relief for vmnic6 or vmnic1.  In other words, with vPort (no Etherchannel) of load balancing, two active/active adapters are not 'Standby' to each other.  Is that correct, or am I wrong?

  I ask because I see this routinely on customer sites.  But what I always have it set up as a channel of port for a single switch, if two switches or was to be used, then I made active/active and then included a Standby adapter for failover should one Fail of active principles.  Or, if all I need is resumed, not load balancing, I just did a single active/passive and alternate ports between them as a form of manual balancing groups.

  I always just assumed Active would not switch to another asset without a port channel/IP-hash config (where the whole reason for standby in the first place).  I'm quite right or completely wrong?  Later today, I want to test this is a lab while monitoring with top.

  

  With the default configuration in your example, the virtual machine-> Teddy assignment is when a virtual machine is running. In the case of a Teddy/link failure the VMs will be assigned to other natachasery. A standby NIC cannot be used unless there is a power failure.

  André

• ESXi - NIC teaming/load balancing

  If I use two network cards on the back of my ESXi server that provide load balancing or is it just for the failover?
  
  Each card NETWORK must have its own IP address?
  
  I have to manually team network cards or is it an automatic process?
  Or ESXi provides only the load balancing, as appropriate...?
  
  If one of my virtual machines use it of full 1 Gigabit, another VM connection will use the other NETWORK adapter connected?
  
  

  To add to the reply by Dave - it's technically not not balancing load even if it is called VMware - the best description is load balancing - type three methods Load Balansing ESXi offers are:

  1. Port according to ID - this the method by default when you have 2 or more physical NIC connected to a virtual switch. The VM traffic is realized on a physical NETWORK card based on the VMs virtual port ID and is incremented in the style of round robin. So if you have 2 NICs physical network, the first drop of will traffic VMs that the first NIC, the second VM shuts down to the second NIC, third comes out first NETWORK card and operating system on - host ESXi does not resemble the traffic so if VMs 1,3,5 are heavy network users they will go on the same NETWORK adapter even if the second NETWORK card can be totally unused
  2. Address based MAC - based similar to port, but the physical NETWORK adapter is selected according to the MAC address of virtual machines
  3. IP hash database - the physical NETWORK adapter is selected based on the starting and destination IP address - so if a virtual machine connect to several IP addresses that traffic will be disttibuted on all physical network cards - note this will require LACp be configured on the physical spend this ost ESXi connects to

• Load balancer and the consolidation of NETWORK cards

  Hello

  We recently had to our file VMware Server after a bit nasty failure of his original material.  Since we moved, it mostly worked OK, but we don't get the occational network shares paw when large files are thrown on.

  ESXi host, sure it works use 5Gbit ethernet adapters on the same Virtual Switch.  Looking at the traffic it would seem that all traffic flows in just a single NETWORK adapter and it is not much at all through the others.  Is something that I need to set it up so that it can better load balance between network cards?  Or is it a document anywhere who recommended settings for multiple network cards?

  I found a vDS topic but we have not undertaken more liciencing on most of our servers.

  We run VSphere 4.1 via the Vcentre server.

  Thanks for the help.

  faster4233 wrote:

  What you say makes a little more sense on what I see.  There is very little traffic flowing through other NETWORK cards, but is perhaps because there isn't any real traffic goes to them.  I thought that VMware may use multiple NICs, if it was required that is why I thought I'd see more data on the other.

  Curiosity is anyway that I can combine NICs for more flow using VMware?

  The load balancing, you can achieve with VMware is not a "real" load balancing, this is more a static distribution of traffic in accordance with the policy, you have chosen.

  You use means that according to the virtual switch port ID the vNIC to the host is connected to a specific bear is chosen. This unique vNIC traffic will use this bear as long as this bear does not fail. In this case the guests more with vNIC, you have the better are used Teddy.

  Other policies can be better for other scenarios. For example, 'Hash IP' uses the source IP address and target to choose a teddy bear. It is a good policy for a server with a vNIC single file and many different communication partners. The 'Source Port' policy route all traffic through a teddy bear so that 'Hash IP' policy would use many Teddy as not what ID port is used, but the communications partners. And a file server must have many of them, more than it has of vNIC.

  AWo

  VCP 3 & 4

  \[:o]===\[o:]

  = You want to have this ad as a ringtone on your mobile phone? =

  = Send 'Assignment' to 911 for only $999999,99! =

• Difference between the Port ID of the load balancer and MAC?

  There are three strategies for load balancing in 4.0 (one more now in 4.1):

  Function hash IP route

  Route based on the originating Virtual Port ID

  Route in function interference source to the MAC

  I think that I understand perfectly the "IP hash" and how it relates to switches, but what really is the difference between 'source MAC' and 'Port ID'?

  They seems both to do something very similar, which is attached a VM to a physical network card. Why someone should choose the CBC MAC and why the Port-ID? Is there a difference in the way that traffic will extend that could be interesting, when you do a design?

  Hello.

  To simplify, to really all boils down to the formula used to distribute traffic natachasery.

  "Discover Ken Cline" [the great vSwitch debate - part 3 | http://kensvirtualreality.wordpress.com/2009/04/05/The-Great-vswitch-Debate%E2%80%93part-3/] "for many more details on each option works.

  Good luck!

• Problem with load balancing

  Hello

  I have a model SAN SUN 7117 and ESXi server in a HP DL120G6. The SAN has 4 of the NIC for iSCSI traffic and the ESX has 4 NIC, but only 2 NIC's for iSCSI. In the SAN, I configured an LACP aggregation with 4 NIC problem is that, in the ESXi, I see that only one NETWORK adapter works.

  What is the problem?

  There are some screenshots of setting anchors.

  

  SAN CONFIGURATION

  

  If you need any screenshoot credit information ask for me.

  How can I test and check that the load balancing is working correctly?

  Thank you!

  As previous authors have written, so that the load with a vSwitch policies balancing offers you need more targets and virtual machines more (which is not the case that you use iSCSI).

  Hash IP needs more targets to spread the load.

  Check KB 1011340 and this article: http://vmetc.com/2009/08/12/vswitch-with-multiple-vkernel-portgroups-for-vsphere-iscsi-round-robin-mpio/

  You will find a section he describe different storage vendors have different configurations on the LB on iSCSI, but it's the same with all providers:

  AWo

  VCP 3 & 4

  \[:o]===\[o:]

  = You want to have this ad as a ringtone on your mobile phone? =

  = Send 'Assignment' to 911 for only $999999,99! =

• NIC Teaming: ID v-port-based load balancing

  Hey all,.

  According to VMWare ESXi does not support physical host interfaces LACP trunks.  I was told that the NIC teaming feature will allow you to specify which physical interface traffic is pushed through the source IP/VM database.  I was able to locate the NIC teaming settings in load balancing vSwitch properties, but I cannot determine how to set up a specific virtual machine, vNIC or source/destination IP address to use a specific physical NIC

  Can someone tell me how to proceed?  The setting of balancing says "Route based on originating virtual port ID"...  This isn't not always tell me how to assign a virtual interface to a specific physical interface.  Ideally, I would like to specify a destination IP address and a physical interface to use when accessing this IP address.  Simply being able to map a group of virtual machines to use a physical interface (without going through the VM groups on different vSwitches) would do well.

  Any suggestion is appreciated.

  Thank you!

  -Ben

  Intellectual property of hash based mode, 1Gbit/s physics 2 network cards can be effectively combined in 1 2 Gbps link?  Meaning regardless of VM, source/destinaltion IP/network, traffic etc will be shared between the two network cards until they are both is completely saturated?

  No, certainly not. It's like Weinstein explained. The NETWORK card used is based on the source and destination IP.

  You can take a look at VMware Virtual Networking Concepts that explains the different modes in detail.

  Route based on the hash of the IP ... Regularity of the distribution of traffic depends on the number of TCP/IP sessions for unique destinations. There is no advantage for the bulk transfer between a single pair of hosts.

  André

• Using 2 vNIC load balancing?

  Hi all

  I was wondering if I attribute to a vNIC VM 2, there will be no tolerance of failure/load balancing on this configuration? We have some Symantec devices on whitch it comes as a recommendation.

  Thank you!

  4nd7 wrote:

  In this case there will be load-balanced, no?

  Not really... If you comment using a vNIC enormously and one not one alone, traffic is not get distributed also on the bears from the vSwitch.

  There are other policies available that might better integrate according to the virtual computer tasks to perform. A virtual file server with a vNIC could better to run on IP hash strategy. In this case, the IP addresses of the communication partners are used to spread the load (at the level of vSwitch). As a file server usually communicates with more than one host, you get a better distribution of the load.

  If you have smart switches that support a protocol for load balancing you can use.

  AWo

  VCP 3 & 4

  Author @ vmwire.net

  \[:o]===\[o:]

  = You want to have this ad as a ringtone on your mobile phone? =

  = Send 'Assignment' to 911 for only $999999,99! =