If resource utilization is set high enough, and you want parallel
sessions going over different ports, you can request the switch be
set to balance on source port.

But only if you've already exhausted the gains to be found in jumbo
packets and interrupt mitigation.

[RC]

On Jun 27, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Richard Rhodes wrote:

"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 06/27/2007
02:48:59 PM:

I realize you that you do not want to use EtherChannel, my
question is

why not?  Asking for another couple of adapters and an extra couple of
switch ports should not be a big deal these days.

EtherChannel on AIX will do exactly want you want with single IP
address

and the TSM clients will not know that they are talking to the backup
interface and without the networking folks having to

set up any thing on their end (i.e. EtherChannel or what they also
call

bonding).

Maybe, or maybe not . . .

Etherchannel is not a true load balanced pipe.  You have to carefully
select what the hash works against on both AIX side and the switch
side. I
have my etherchannels setup in aix to on the destination ip addr (tsm
clients), and the switch is set for the source ip addr (tsm
clients).  This
is because I'm going from many clients to one tsm server.  If you
only have
a few clients, it's entirelly possible to fill one leg of the
channel and
leave the other leg not doing much.

Rick


-----------------------------------------
The information contained in this message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that you have received this document in error
and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete
the original message.