LACP on Migration

[Tipenso]

Good morning, everyone.

I would like your opinion.
I have currently configured a migration network on two dedicated ports, configured in LACP 802.3ad L2+L3, in all my Proxmox hosts.
Do you think this is best practice, or do you see any critical issues with it, such as worse performance or anything else compared to a single port? Or would it be better to use aggregations other than LACP for some reason?
I made this decision for both redundancy and greater bandwidth, but I can't take advantage of the latter because I haven't yet managed to set up bulk migration tasks > 1...

Thanks a lot.

 

[bbgeek17]

Hi @Tipenso ,

Your current L2+L3 setup refers to MAC + IP addressing.

• A single migration from host A to host B will use a single combination of source/destination MAC and IP, meaning only one port will be utilized.
• Ten concurrent migrations from host A to host B will still use the same single combination of source/destination MAC and IP, again, only one port is used.
• Concurrent migrations from host A to multiple hosts (B, C, D) will potentially distribute traffic across multiple MAC/IP combinations. It will depend on resulting hash. It is possible that you will still end up on single link if you are unlucky.

That said, network saturation is unlikely to be your bottleneck unless you are using very low-bandwidth links.

The best approach is to test the expected traffic pattern in your environment. Depending on your setup, an L3/L4 configuration may perform better, or it may show no difference if the bottleneck is elsewhere.

---

Blockbridge : Ultra low latency all-NVME shared storage for Proxmox - https://www.blockbridge.com/proxmox