Comments on: Link-based IPMP setup with VCS http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/ UNIX/Solaris tips, tricks, and advice Sun, 08 Jan 2012 13:46:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Laurene Menn http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/comment-page-1/#comment-66970 Laurene Menn Fri, 22 Jul 2011 16:19:02 +0000 http://www.runningunix.com/?p=89#comment-66970 Your blog is amazing, i subscribed your blog! Your blog is amazing, i subscribed your blog!

]]> By: Jacobs Greg http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/comment-page-1/#comment-61164 Jacobs Greg Sat, 02 Jul 2011 06:37:17 +0000 http://www.runningunix.com/?p=89#comment-61164 Some truly good blog posts on this web site , regards for contribution. Some truly good blog posts on this web site , regards for contribution.

]]> By: Carroll B. Merriman http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/comment-page-1/#comment-59882 Carroll B. Merriman Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:18:58 +0000 http://www.runningunix.com/?p=89#comment-59882 You really make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this matter to be really something that I think I would never understand. It seems too complicated and very broad for me. I am looking forward for your next post, I will try to get the hang of it! You really make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this matter to be really something that I think I would never understand. It seems too complicated and very broad for me. I am looking forward for your next post, I will try to get the hang of it!

]]> By: Addie Souliere http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/comment-page-1/#comment-55190 Addie Souliere Mon, 13 Jun 2011 18:53:09 +0000 http://www.runningunix.com/?p=89#comment-55190 In my next article I'm preparing to reveal to you my thinking process when is shows correspondence to this. In my next article I’m preparing to reveal to you my thinking process when is shows correspondence to this.

]]> By: Rio Ferdinand Fansite http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/comment-page-1/#comment-6507 Rio Ferdinand Fansite Mon, 13 Dec 2010 12:42:19 +0000 http://www.runningunix.com/?p=89#comment-6507 Have you seen Rio's tweets about this? Have you seen Rio’s tweets about this?

]]> By: Philadelphia web design http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/comment-page-1/#comment-6301 Philadelphia web design Sun, 12 Dec 2010 06:58:13 +0000 http://www.runningunix.com/?p=89#comment-6301 this is a greatly interesting enter, thank you for the information. Pitiful my english is not the uncommonly best. do you remember if it is practicable to translate this to the spanish language. that would be very helpfull. this is a greatly interesting enter, thank you for the information. Pitiful my english is not the uncommonly best. do you remember if it is practicable to translate this to the spanish language. that would be very helpfull.

]]> By: admin http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/comment-page-1/#comment-526 admin Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:26:11 +0000 http://www.runningunix.com/?p=89#comment-526 To be honest I've never tried it with aggregates. Have you tried just using the aggregate names in the devices instead of the physical interface names? Not sure how or if mpathd works with aggregates. To be honest I’ve never tried it with aggregates. Have you tried just using the aggregate names in the devices instead of the physical interface names? Not sure how or if mpathd works with aggregates.

]]> By: Charles http://www.runningunix.com/2009/01/link-based-ipmp-setup-with-vcs/comment-page-1/#comment-525 Charles Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:08:42 +0000 http://www.runningunix.com/?p=89#comment-525 What if you're using aggragates like so: [Wed Jul 01 11:47:36 root@wolverine: MP3] # ifconfig -a lo0: flags=2001000849 mtu 8232 index 1 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000 aggr1: flags=201000843 mtu 1500 index 2 inet 10.110.18.97 netmask fffff000 broadcast 10.0.31.255 groupname production ether 0:15:17:ad:2:46 aggr1:1: flags=209040843 mtu 1500 index 2 inet 10.110.18.95 netmask fffff000 broadcast 10.0.31.255 aggr2: flags=201000843 mtu 1500 index 3 inet 0.0.0.0 netmask ff000000 broadcast 0.255.255.255 groupname production ether 0:21:28:14:dd:1e aggr2:1: flags=209040843 mtu 1500 index 3 inet 10.110.18.96 netmask fffff000 broadcast 10.0.31.255 What if you’re using aggragates like so:

[Wed Jul 01 11:47:36 root@wolverine: MP3] # ifconfig -a
lo0: flags=2001000849 mtu 8232 index 1
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000
aggr1: flags=201000843 mtu 1500 index 2
inet 10.110.18.97 netmask fffff000 broadcast 10.0.31.255
groupname production
ether 0:15:17:ad:2:46
aggr1:1: flags=209040843 mtu 1500 index 2
inet 10.110.18.95 netmask fffff000 broadcast 10.0.31.255
aggr2: flags=201000843 mtu 1500 index 3
inet 0.0.0.0 netmask ff000000 broadcast 0.255.255.255
groupname production
ether 0:21:28:14:dd:1e
aggr2:1: flags=209040843 mtu 1500 index 3
inet 10.110.18.96 netmask fffff000 broadcast 10.0.31.255

]]>