VMware Cloud Community
Geokes
Contributor
Contributor
Jump to solution

Best practice for Network Adapter Teaming for Management Networks

Quote from http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/techpaper/VMW-Server-WP-BestPractices.pdf :

Network Adapter Teaming and Management Networks:

To configure a network adapter team for the management network, configure the vNICs in the vSwitch
configuration for the ESX/ESXi host, for active/standby configuration.

The vSwitch should be configured as follows:
• Load balancing = route based on the originating virtual port ID (default)
• Failback = “No”
• vSwitch0: two physical network adapters (for example: vmnic0 & vmnic2)
• Two port groups (for example, vMotion and management)

In this example, the management network runs on vSwitch0 as active on vmnic0 and standby on vmnic2.
The vMotion network runs on vSwitch0 as active on vmnic2 and standby on vmnic0.

My setup:

Both adapters active (not active/standby)

Failback = “Yes”

Not clear if the management network and vMotion are both active on the same vmnic or on different ones.

Question:

Is ESXi 4.1 smart enough to keep the management network and vMotion on different vmnics by itself or I should change to active/standby config and make sure they are on different vmnics?

Would it make a noticeable difference?

Reply
0 Kudos
1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
beyondvm
Hot Shot
Hot Shot
Jump to solution

Ah yes, you are correct in your setup then.  I would never mix NIC vendors in any type of trunk, I have seen things get funky now and then.  VAAI will only give you a benefit when you are doing a storage vMotion, normal vMotion will still use the same amount of traffic because the memory maps will still need to be copied between the hosts.  It is best practice to dedicate at least one NIC to management and at least one NIC to vMotion, if you cannot have two vSwitches with two NIC each then I would use explicit failover order as you mentioned.  Hope that helps!

--- If you found any of my comments helpful please consider awarding points for "Correct" or "Helpful". Thanks!!! www.beyondvm.com

View solution in original post

Reply
0 Kudos
4 Replies
beyondvm
Hot Shot
Hot Shot
Jump to solution

Depending on your teaming policy, yes and no (that is probably the most ambiguous answer ever).

What is your teaming policy? (that will help me answer more accurately)

If you want to be 100% sure that they are always on opposite adapters you should set them up with specified active and standby adapters like you mentioned.  This would be an acceptable configuration in my book and I have had great success configuring environments like this in the past, but some other engineers might disagree.  The best option in my opinion is to configure 802.3ad so that they both can use both ports.

--- If you found any of my comments helpful please consider awarding points for "Correct" or "Helpful". Thanks!!! www.beyondvm.com
Reply
0 Kudos
Geokes
Contributor
Contributor
Jump to solution

I have some complicating factors,  802.3ad is probably not an option:
- two physical switches (PowerConnect 5424)
- vmnic0 is Intel, vmnic6 is broadcom (Dell R610 - four onboard broadcom ports and a four port Intel NIC. For redundancy one port from each is used)
- "Link aggregation is never supported on disparate trunked switches" (ESX link aggregation)

With VAAI, vMotion traffic should be light(er) so I'm wondering if this is a change worth making in a production environment or just leave it alone.
(the load on the cluster will increase significantly in the near future, so its now or never )

Reply
0 Kudos
beyondvm
Hot Shot
Hot Shot
Jump to solution

Ah yes, you are correct in your setup then.  I would never mix NIC vendors in any type of trunk, I have seen things get funky now and then.  VAAI will only give you a benefit when you are doing a storage vMotion, normal vMotion will still use the same amount of traffic because the memory maps will still need to be copied between the hosts.  It is best practice to dedicate at least one NIC to management and at least one NIC to vMotion, if you cannot have two vSwitches with two NIC each then I would use explicit failover order as you mentioned.  Hope that helps!

--- If you found any of my comments helpful please consider awarding points for "Correct" or "Helpful". Thanks!!! www.beyondvm.com
Reply
0 Kudos
Geokes
Contributor
Contributor
Jump to solution

I will make the change then.

Reply
0 Kudos