To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I'm not the one embarrassing myself. Maybe all you guys who talks so much about this need some real world experience? Link aggregation/etherchannel/bonding is great, but in practice you still dont get a dedicated "channel" to every device you talk to. Sure, you could put a hundred NIC's in your server but that's not good design by any stretch of the imagination.
This has nothing to do with gigabit by the way. Everything everyone has mentioned in this thread could be done with good ole ethernet and fastethernet. The main reason you're getting better performance with gigabit NICS is not because they can handle a higher wire speed, it is because the cards have better buffering and interrupt mitigation techniques than what most ethernet/fastethernet cards has.
Gigabit is great but there's going to be some time before it is needed on the endpoints and currently it's mostly useful in the backbone.
Don't make assumptions about my experience, you don't know me. My point was you treated the guy like an idiot for suggesting you can increase bandwidth by using technology like etherchannel, which is in widespread use.







Member since:
2005-07-06
Read, understand and stop being an ass, you're embarrassing the real professionals :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EtherChannel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPMP