<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic ifgrp favor per vlan? in ONTAP Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/ifgrp-favor-per-vlan/m-p/99488#M20221</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I would like to load balance 4 ethernet ports between two switches.&amp;nbsp; e4a and e4b connect to switch A; e5a and e5b connect to switch B.&amp;nbsp; vlan 10 traffic should go to switch A, and vlan 20 should go to switch B, with each switch backing up the other.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The following configuration will send traffic to the correct switch:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create single vif0 e4a e5a&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp favor e4a&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create single vif1 e4b e5b&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp favor e5b&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan create vif0 10&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan create vif1 20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But this leaves e4b and e5a unutilized during normal operation.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm thinking something like this would be better (with appropriate etherchannel config on switches):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create lacp vif1 -b ip e4a e4b&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create lacp vif2 -b ip e5a e5b&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create single&amp;nbsp;vif0 vif1 vif2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan create vif0 10 20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But I would need to&amp;nbsp;configure vif0-10 to favor&amp;nbsp;vif1 and vif0-20 to favor vif2.&amp;nbsp; Switches&amp;nbsp;do this with&amp;nbsp;per-vlan spanning tree priority, and VMware has per-portgroup active/standby configuration, but I'm not finding any way to do this with 7-mode.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is this possible?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I appreciate any suggestions (including something completely different!)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 05:16:19 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>GaryL</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-06-05T05:16:19Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ifgrp favor per vlan?</title>
      <link>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/ifgrp-favor-per-vlan/m-p/99488#M20221</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I would like to load balance 4 ethernet ports between two switches.&amp;nbsp; e4a and e4b connect to switch A; e5a and e5b connect to switch B.&amp;nbsp; vlan 10 traffic should go to switch A, and vlan 20 should go to switch B, with each switch backing up the other.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The following configuration will send traffic to the correct switch:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create single vif0 e4a e5a&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp favor e4a&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create single vif1 e4b e5b&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp favor e5b&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan create vif0 10&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan create vif1 20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But this leaves e4b and e5a unutilized during normal operation.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm thinking something like this would be better (with appropriate etherchannel config on switches):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create lacp vif1 -b ip e4a e4b&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create lacp vif2 -b ip e5a e5b&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ifgrp create single&amp;nbsp;vif0 vif1 vif2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;vlan create vif0 10 20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But I would need to&amp;nbsp;configure vif0-10 to favor&amp;nbsp;vif1 and vif0-20 to favor vif2.&amp;nbsp; Switches&amp;nbsp;do this with&amp;nbsp;per-vlan spanning tree priority, and VMware has per-portgroup active/standby configuration, but I'm not finding any way to do this with 7-mode.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is this possible?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I appreciate any suggestions (including something completely different!)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 05:16:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.netapp.com/t5/ONTAP-Discussions/ifgrp-favor-per-vlan/m-p/99488#M20221</guid>
      <dc:creator>GaryL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-06-05T05:16:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

