Load balancing: Route Based on IP Hash vs Route based on originating virtual port ID

So as the network grows, I'm finding now more and more of a need to funnel things through the port-port channel of the ESXi hosts or I'll just need to buy more nic ports. But in an effort to save the company money I have a question, I sort of ran into my 1st true hurdle so far.

So lets keep it simple, I have 16 vLAN's. I have port-channels to the hosts and now to save on adding more nics I need to funnel vlans through the port-channel but so far the only way I can do that is by changing the load balancing to originating virtual port ID.

Am I limited to either or in this case, either I'm stuck with using a massive pipe with 'IP hash' or I go to 'virtual port ID' so I can use vLAN's with a much smaller pipe.

Basically I'm now moving the Production vlan in to separate vlans to increase performance, IE they just told us they want big printout AutoCAD printers and 3D printers that push big autoCAD files all over the network and this shouldn't be on the same vlan as a SQL query so I need to split up the network even further. On the same token they won't spend $1000 on two more Quad nics, but I digress....

I mean 'could' I use 'IP Hash' and pipe multiple vlans over it?

according to this, it saying I need to do it like X but not saying I can't do Z but I want to be sure.

As for creating the vLAN in the ESXi host(s), I'm pretty sure, someone correct me, but I think I go to 'Networking' and then click on properties on the vSwitch in question and then go to go to 'Add' and then basically add a 'Virtual Machine - Port Group' and call it sure, 'Elmo is Awesome' and assign say vlan 50 to the 'vLAN ID (Optional)' box and then press Next and Finish.

Then say if vLAN 50 is for say these lovely massive printers, I assign a new E1000 nic on say the Print Server and assign the 'Elmo is Awesome' Port Group to that nic for the VM's options of the Print Server so the Print server can send print jobs to these printers....

It been a while since I did that in the home-lab so this is just a guess. my logic might be rusty....

moral of story I'd really like to keep using the port-channel but if I can't I guess I'll bite the bullet.

VMware KB: Sample configuration of virtual switch VLAN tagging (VST Mode)

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Deathmage

I guess if there is no way around it I'd have to move around some cables and make the servers on the port-channel and funnel everything else over a twin port-channel.

Deathmage

figured it out, I almost blew it up though...

found this article after lots and lots of digging: https://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/support/landing_pages/Virtual-Support-Day-Best-Practices-Virtual-Networking-June-2012.pdf

iBrokeIT

Glad to hear you got it figured out but why are you using E1000s and not VMXnet3?

Deathmage wrote: »

I assign a new E1000 nic on say the Print Server

http://anthonyspiteri.net/quick-post-e1000-vs-vmxnet3/

CBEPzXtUwAEkINs.jpg

jibbajabba

IP Hash is a must when Port channels are being used in the physical stack. If not I'd rather go with load based teaming. And I agree, have a look at the vmxnet nic, especially when SQL servers are involved.

Deathmage

iBrokeIT wrote: »

Glad to hear you got it figured out but why are you using E1000s and not VMXnet3?

Quick Post: E1000 vs VMXNET3 - VIRTUALIZATION IS LIFE!

read someplace that VMXnet3 doesn't work with VLAN tagging. now i can't find the article, /faceplam.

jibbajabba wrote: »

IP Hash is a must when Port channels are being used in the physical stack. If not I'd rather go with load based teaming. And I agree, have a look at the vmxnet nic, especially when SQL servers are involved.

Well to think about it, VMXNET3 is being used on the servers vlan which includes SQL, the printers vlans and the desktop vlan but the backups are just on a E1000. The Dell R510 24 TB Tier 3 Backup Server has a Nic driver that don't have jumbo frames support on it so VMXNET3 seemed pointless. However they are all trunked over a (5) Cat5e port-channel with IP Hash per host.

Printers are only pushing out so much couldn't see a 10G virtual pipe doing much for just printers but added it anyways, it's the broadcast traffic I was worried about with it formerly being on the same vlan as SQL queries and general web traffic.. I initially did do it to E1000 for the print server but after thought most of the traffic in a few months will be coming from the Terminal Server Farm so I figured to just keep it at 10G after some thought. I figure keeping the print server on the same host as the TS Farm is probably ideal, this way the VMXNET3 driver will have the most benefit.

But thanks for the points you both.

kj0

The issue we found was that E1000E would drop after so many days on Server 2012 R2.

The other benefit of using VMXNet and also such things like Paravirtual Controllers is that they are less resource intensive. For a nested lab where contention strikes quickly, I have noticed a difference. Check out Michael Websters (Long White Virtual Clouds | all things vmware, cloud and virtualizing business critical applications) post comparing the NICs and Controllers - He has a few from last year.