VMware vSwitch Routed Based on IP Hash etherchannel

[Herry_Lie]

Hi VMware community

I am studying more about vSwitch (Routed Based On IP Hash).

Based on the KB that I read, that Routed Based On IP Hash can be used on vSwitch by using Etherchannel.

But EtherChannel is a port link aggregation technology or port-channel architecture used primarily on Cisco switches.

and in KB explained that to use routed based on ip hash we have to use static LAG.

My question is whether routed based on ip hash can only use etherchannel which is proprietary to cisco? Can I use static LAGs that exist on other brand switches?

For example Dell power connect or Force10.

Sorry for my bad english

[SureshKumarMuth]

Yes, you can use both.

In cisco we call it as etherchannel

In HP it is called as portchannel

however are both are supported, it should be supported on other switches as well irrespective how we name it. Ultimate thing is LAG , we should have the NICs grouped at physical switch level.

You can test the functionality on one host first then proceed with other hosts.

[Herry_Lie]

Hi Sureshkumar

As you've explained LAG has various names in every brand.

That's why I'm confused because the statement described in vmware KB says etherchannel therefore I just want to make sure that etherchannel and port-channel are exactly the same.

I'm analyzing if vswitch can use static LAG then this can maximize vswitch performance with limited environment.

My goal is to provide maximum results with a limited environment

Thank you for the information

[daphnissov]

If your goal is maximum performance with as little overhead as possible, don't use LAGs in any fashion. LAGs ultimately do not evenly distribute traffic over the available links, they just share them. If you want maximum performance and minimal configuration, use a vDS with the teaming policy to "route based on physical NIC load" as this algorithm intelligently analyzes the existing uplinks and readjusts traffic if one NIC becomes more than 75% saturated. It requires no special physical switch configuration.

[Herry_Lie]

Hi Daphnissov

Yes, you are right. But to use vDS we have to use enterprise plus.

We are only able to provide a standard license.

This is why I am trying to find another alternative.

A few days ago I found a blog explaining that vSwitch can use Routed Based on IP Hash.

Therefore I am trying to ask the user in the community to ask if this method can be used

But if you say LAG is not really good maybe I will go back to using originating virtual port id

Thank you for your advice

[daphnissov]

Just to clarify, I'm not saying using LAGs is not good, I'm just saying you should be using it for the right reasons. The vast, vast majority of the time I see people using LAGs of any kind is because they don't understand how they work versus what the options are within ESXi/vCenter. If you want to have NIC redundancy, a LAG isn't required. If you want to load share available uplinks, LAG still isn't required. Use LAGs for some other reasons. Otherwise, make your life simpler and use options that are baked into vSphere.

[MBreidenbach0]

Some good reading about standard switches - this is from 2009 but still true for standard switches:

https://kensvirtualreality.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/the-great-vswitch-debate-combined.pdf

Distributed virtual switches offer a lot of new features not discussed in that document.