<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">It's been a little while for me, but going by <a href="https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt</a> it looks as if the driver sends one or more gratuitous ARPs out the active interface on state changes, which could be close to the root of the problem depending on how the switches are deployed (standalone? stacked?) If you're in a position to reproduce, you might capture ARP traffic from both interfaces.</div><br class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_quote gmail_msg"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 3:49 PM Eric Robinson <<a href="mailto:eric.robinson@psmnv.com" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">eric.robinson@psmnv.com</a>> wrote:<br class="gmail_msg"></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote gmail_msg" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="gmail_msg">
<div id="m_-8781763859252439004m_1679188259314074443divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif" dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">
<p class="gmail_msg">mode 1. No special switch configuration. spanning tree not enabled. I have 100+ Linux servers, all of which use bonding. The network has been stable for 10 years. No changes recently. However, this is the second time that we have seen high latency and traced
it down to the behavior of one particular server. I'm wondering if there is something about bonding that could result in a temporary bridge loop.<br class="gmail_msg">
</p>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" class="gmail_msg">
<div id="m_-8781763859252439004m_1679188259314074443divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000" class="gmail_msg"><b class="gmail_msg">From:</b> Jeremy Voorhis <<a href="mailto:jvoorhis@gmail.com" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">jvoorhis@gmail.com</a>><br class="gmail_msg">
<b class="gmail_msg">Sent:</b> Tuesday, November 15, 2016 2:13:59 PM<br class="gmail_msg">
<b class="gmail_msg">To:</b> Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed<br class="gmail_msg">
<b class="gmail_msg">Subject:</b> Re: [ClusterLabs] Can Bonding Cause a Broadcast Storm?</font>
<div class="gmail_msg"> </div>
</div></div><div class="gmail_msg">
<div class="gmail_msg">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">What bonding mode are you using? Some modes require additional configuration from the switch to avoid flooding. Also, is spanning tree enabled on the switches?</div>
<br class="gmail_msg">
<div class="gmail_quote gmail_msg">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 1:26 PM Eric Robinson <<a href="mailto:eric.robinson@psmnv.com" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">eric.robinson@psmnv.com</a>> wrote:<br class="gmail_msg">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote gmail_msg" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
If a Linux server with bonded interfaces attached to different switches is rebooted, is it possible that a bridge loop could result for a brief period? We noticed that one of our 100 Linux servers became unresponsive and appears to have rebooted. (The cause
has not been determined.) A couple of minutes afterwards, we saw a gigantic spike in traffic on all switches in the network that lasted for about 7 minutes, causing latency and packet loss on the network. Everything was still reachable, but slowly. The condition
stopped as soon as the Linux server in question became reachable again.<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
--<br class="gmail_msg">
Eric Robinson<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
_______________________________________________<br class="gmail_msg">
Users mailing list: <a href="mailto:Users@clusterlabs.org" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">
Users@clusterlabs.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
Project Home: <a href="http://www.clusterlabs.org" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">
http://www.clusterlabs.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
Getting started: <a href="http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">
http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf</a><br class="gmail_msg">
Bugs: <a href="http://bugs.clusterlabs.org" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">
http://bugs.clusterlabs.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="gmail_msg">
Users mailing list: <a href="mailto:Users@clusterlabs.org" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">Users@clusterlabs.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br class="gmail_msg">
<br class="gmail_msg">
Project Home: <a href="http://www.clusterlabs.org" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">http://www.clusterlabs.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
Getting started: <a href="http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf</a><br class="gmail_msg">
Bugs: <a href="http://bugs.clusterlabs.org" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">http://bugs.clusterlabs.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
</blockquote></div></div>