Aggregation isn't working

[tony33]

I put in to /etc/rc.conf

THIS:

ifconfig_ix0="up"
ifconfig_ix1="up"  
cloned_interfaces="lagg0"
ifconfig_lagg0="laggproto lacp laggport Ix0 laggport Ix1 64.100.200.120/29"

I would see the ifconfig show the interfaces as status active and same with lagg0.
However, if I ping an ip address it would state failed to find route.

I then added defaultrouter=64.100.200.119.

the ip's used are just examples. They're the correct ones. the defaultrouter I used my real gateway ip address.

I also enabled ip packet forwarding. Thi worked when I had the ethernet interfaces to be 2 different individual
connections. Before only the first ethernet interface would work but the second one would have the no route found error.
however, after I added the default gateway and ip packet forwarding and then the second ethernet interface would then work.

I am trying to get the aggregation to work. I would like to know what is needed?
I was told I don't need if_lagg_ etc i the boot/.loader.conf file.
I was told it automatically gets loaded in to the kernel when you create the lagg0.

Any ideas I would try? also what's the right way on doing it. I followed a tutorial and
looked at the handbook. The handbook doesn't say anything about setting the default router
or doing ip poacket forwarding. Howeve,r the tutorials I found said to use ip packet forwarding if you
use more than other Ethernet interface. Then it says to set a default router. Which is the gateway which could be your home router.
Or a gaetway server that your ISP gives you to connect too in order to get internet.
I would like any ideas anyone could have on trying. I can get internet fine if the interfaces are individually setup as individuals interfaces.

 

[SirDice]

ifconfig_lagg0="laggproto lacp laggport Ix0 laggport Ix1 64.100.200.120/29"

You have Ix0 and Ix1 instead of ix0 and ix1.

I also enabled ip packet forwarding.

You don't need this.

Howeve,r the tutorials I found said to use ip packet forwarding if you
use more than other Ethernet interface.

For all intents and purposes the lagg(4) interface is a single interface.

Then it says to set a default router.

Well, you need a route if you have to connect to an IP address that's outside of your configured subnet. This is just basic TCP/IP routing.

 

[sko]

does your switch support LACP and is it configured on the ports you are connecting to (if it doesn't support auto configuration)?

 

[blackbird9]

deleted

 

[SirDice]

Failover and LACP are two different things. With a failover configuration only one member interface is active. With LACP both member interfaces are active and connections are load-balanced between them. Effectively doubling the bandwidth of a single interface.

Link aggregation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[tony33]

does your switch support LACP and is it configured on the ports you are connecting to (if it doesn't support auto configuration)?

Yes, it does and all ports are setup and configured to be this way. It's a netgear prosafe x5748T managed switch. I double checked to make sure the ports are setup to aggregate using LACP. Which it is currently using when I tried to set the server up.

 

[tony33]

Failover and LACP are two different things. With a failover configuration only one member interface is active. With LACP both member interfaces are active and connections are load-balanced between them. Effectively doubling the bandwidth of a single interface.

Link aggregation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yeah, I know. I had this setup before but since my system used freebsd 8 back in 2007. Too many things over time after upgrading and updating broke systems. I gotten to the point where I couldn't get internet at all even by using one nic. That is why I reinstalled freebsd 13.1 from scratch. Which it works but no matter what I do for the aggregation. It won't work. I have it setup to use LACP and I want it to use both ports as one. Both are 10gb and needs to total to 20gb.

 

[tony33]

You have Ix0 and Ix1 instead of ix0 and ix1.


You don't need this.


For all intents and purposes the lagg(4) interface is a single interface.

Well, you need a route if you have to connect to an IP address that's outside of your configured subnet. This is just basic TCP/IP routing.

I will try that. I will change the i to an I. I don't know if that would make a difference but will give that a try. I would assume if it mattered that it would have shown an error of no such interface.

 

[tony33]

You have Ix0 and Ix1 instead of ix0 and ix1.


You don't need this.


For all intents and purposes the lagg(4) interface is a single interface.

Well, you need a route if you have to connect to an IP address that's outside of your configured subnet. This is just basic TCP/IP routing.

I had lowercase i. I just tried using the I upper case and it gives me an error saying device not configured. I mistyped in the original post.
I originally had the lower case i.

I think the config is fine. I am guessing now of 2 things. Either my ISP blocked my mac address or one port is defective.
right now want to rule out the idea that my mac address got blocked.
Is there anyway I can spoof my mac address?

The reason I think this is that when I disable aggregation and have the 2 ethernet ports run on their own. One works and the other doesn't.
even if I set it to use DHCP that one port won't get any ip allocation. but the other would get an ip address assigned by ISP.

The reason I say this is that I had my server hacked in the past and I suspect the person complain to my ISP impersonating me
asking to get a mac address blocked. The reason is that the networking stopped working at all and I suspected someone
made changes to the file and configuration. Which is why I am starting from scratch again reinstalling freebsd 13.1 clean.
to me the ethernet port seems to work.

any ideas what I can do to test things out?

 

[sko]

Are you trying to aggregate ports that connect to your ISP upstream connection?? This a) won't work and b) makes absolutely no sense...

Please show us a diagram of the topology you are trying to build here.

 

[tony33]

Are you trying to aggregate ports that connect to your ISP upstream connection?? This a) won't work and b) makes absolutely no sense...

Please show us a diagram of the topology you are trying to build here.

My switch supports to aggregate 4 ports for ISP aka WAN.
but no I have a single 1 line from ISP that connects.

I have 2 desktop machines that have 2 ethernet ports each.
Both work fine. I can have them use DHCP or my static ip's just fine.
So, it's not at all a network issue. What the windows machine you just enable
a driver and create an adaptor. Enter either DHCP or static ip with netmask and gateway.
All is straight forward and works. I never had any issues setting those up. It works flawlessly.

My gut feeling is that my ISP must have blocked my server mac address. I have a commercial account with them.
Which permits me to use my own server etc.

My server there's 2 ethernet ports ix0 and ix1. The ix1 I feel might be blocked.

If I set them to work as separate individual ethernet ports. If I assign them my static ip.
The ix0 works fine. The ix1 doesn't not at all. but if I use DHCP both work fine.
the DHCP uses a different router gateway that's on my ISP side.
Those only works if I enable default router and ip packet forwarding. If I don't have these on
it get a routing error. I tried both turning them off and having them on. It only works if these are on.
It looks like once one ix0 is the internal gateway and if I have ix0 down then I lose all connection.
including ix1. I read online that for freebsd you need to have them on. It was on a tutorial.
They said that freebsed uses 1 ethernet ass default connection. if there's another ethernet port
then you need to turn on the routing and gateway settings. Which routes traffic thru ix0.

If I don't have those default router on for static it won't work at all for both these ethernet ports.
if I don't have ip forwarding on then ix1 won't work if using DHCP or static ip. ix1 won't also
work at all with static ip by itself regardless if default router was on or IP forwarding was on or not.


So, the only way I can get ix0 and ix1 to work is to use them individual using default router on and gateway on.
ix0 works with both static and DHCP. the ix1 static cannot work at all but works with DHCP only if ip forwarding is turned on
and this heavily relies on ix0 to be up and running. if ix0 is down it would cause ix1 to not work because ix0 would act as a gateway.
This is only when acting as 2 individual ethernet ports.


the static ip has a fixed gateway. I feel my ix1 might have been blocked based on mac address.
because it works only if it's a assigned DHCP. I haven't gotten it to work with aggregation.

The aggregation won't work at all. I followed the freebsd manel and followed a tutorial
that follows the same thing as t he freebsd Manuel .

The errors I get are routing errors. I would ping 8.8.8.8 and get 100% packet loss.
I recently tried doing ifconfig ix0 ether and specified a fake mac address. that didn't work.
right now it's late but will try tomorrow to check the switch. I know there's feature that is on
that prevents mac spoofing. It would block any mac spoofing.


also in the past I was able to get freebsd server to aggregate. That is why I know it's not a config issue. Since it looks like nothing new changed
on how to set it up. That is why I am suspecting my ix1 ethernet is blocked. I will check tomorrow in my switch to see to turn off in security mac spoofing.
I know in my switch there's a setting that is set on that blocks any port that does mac spoofing. I personally want to avoid this but for now want to
see if I can spoof my ix1 mac and it works. It will let me know that my mac address got blocked. I would then have to talk with my ISP.

 

[tony33]

Are you trying to aggregate ports that connect to your ISP upstream connection?? This a) won't work and b) makes absolutely no sense...

Please show us a diagram of the topology you are trying to build here.

that is possible and it's called wan aggregation but I am not doing this. I am aggregating 2 Ethernet ports on my server.