- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- HPE BladeSystem
- >
- BladeSystem - General
- >
- Question about failover latency on VC
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
04-21-2010 09:07 AM
04-21-2010 09:07 AM
Question about failover latency on VC
Jun had a customer quesiton on how long it takes for VC to recognize a failed uplink and failover to a backup link:
****************************************************************************************************************
I know that LLDP on VC can find the loop in the network and automatically disable the uplink port on VC. If the active link failed, how much time will be taken to fulfill the failover? In general, for common network switch via spanning tree protocol, the link takes about 10s - 40s to recover, that is the point why my customer concern about the latency.
Many thanks for your feedback.
********************************************************************************************************************
Comments back from Paul:
*****************************************************************************************************************
Most VC failover testing I have performed shows a failover to take 3 to 4 pings, closer to 10 seconds than 40 seconds.
LLDP has very different role than STP, and it is not involved in loop detection/prevention, other than characterizing what is at the other end of the link for initial configuration.
Link Layer Discovery Protocol (industry standard) is akin to Cisco CDP (Cisco Discovery Protocol), and is used to discover the capabilities of the port at the other end of a link – chassis name, port #, VLANs, LACP status. So, LLDP is what VC uses to figure out if multiple links in a Vnet or SUS can be active/active or must be active/standby. From that aspect, it prevents loops at initialization time for a Vnet or SUS by making the appropriate active vs standby configuration on an uplink by uplink basis. However, once initialized, I don’t think LLDP has any role in loop detection or prevention, just like CDP does not. To summarize:
LLDP is industry standard equivalent of Cisco proprietary CDP
Unnamed proprietary anti-loop algorithm is HP equivalent of Cisco proprietary STP
*****************************************************************************************************************
Have any of you tested this in your environments? Let us know.