NIC Teaming Issue

I have a cluster using adapter teaming and it seems that when the virtual
server is hosted on node 1, it is not able to resolve past the local
segment. On the other node 2 it works correctly.
Anyone have a ny input on this issue?
Thanks
Aaron
Just a shot, but did someone tinker with the routing table on that node?
You may want to run ROUTE PRINT on both nodes and compare them.
Tom
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinpub.com
..
"Aaron Custer" <aaron@.webmastersonlineinc.com> wrote in message
news:Oa%23aP2ByFHA.3892@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
I have a cluster using adapter teaming and it seems that when the virtual
server is hosted on node 1, it is not able to resolve past the local
segment. On the other node 2 it works correctly.
Anyone have a ny input on this issue?
Thanks
Aaron
|||I just love NIC teaming software - NOT!
Make sure you the latest driver. Check your settings against the working
machine, I am sure it's something simple.
Cheers,
Rod
MVP - Windows Server - Clustering
http://www.nw-america.com - Clustering Website
http://www.msmvps.com/clustering - Blog
http://www.clusterhelp.com - Cluster Training
"Aaron Custer" <aaron@.webmastersonlineinc.com> wrote in message
news:Oa%23aP2ByFHA.3892@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>I have a cluster using adapter teaming and it seems that when the virtual
> server is hosted on node 1, it is not able to resolve past the local
> segment. On the other node 2 it works correctly.
> Anyone have a ny input on this issue?
> Thanks
> Aaron
>
|||Try disabling the NIC teaming. If the problem goes away...I think you've
found the source of you issues.
Regards,
John
"Aaron Custer" <aaron@.webmastersonlineinc.com> wrote in message
news:Oa%23aP2ByFHA.3892@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a cluster using adapter teaming and it seems that when the virtual
> server is hosted on node 1, it is not able to resolve past the local
> segment. On the other node 2 it works correctly.
> Anyone have a ny input on this issue?
> Thanks
> Aaron
>
|||This might be of interest:
The use of NIC teaming on all cluster networks concurrently is not
supported. At least one of the cluster networks that are enabled for
internal communication between cluster nodes must not be teamed. Typically,
the unteamed network is a private interconnect dedicated to this type of
communication. The use of NIC teaming on other cluster networks is
acceptable; however, if communication problems occur on a teamed network,
Microsoft Product Support Services may require that teaming be disabled. If
this action resolves the problem or issue, then you must seek further
assistance from the manufacturer of the teaming solution.
(Windows 2000, Windows Server 2003)
Server Clusters: Network Configuration Best Practices for Windows 2000 and
Windows Server 2003
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../clstntbp.mspx
Sincerely,
Anthony Thomas

"Aaron Custer" <aaron@.webmastersonlineinc.com> wrote in message
news:Oa%23aP2ByFHA.3892@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I have a cluster using adapter teaming and it seems that when the virtual
> server is hosted on node 1, it is not able to resolve past the local
> segment. On the other node 2 it works correctly.
> Anyone have a ny input on this issue?
> Thanks
> Aaron
>

NIC teaming for SQL

Wanted to implement some fault tolerance and wanted to know if anyone of
you'll have implemented NIC teaming on your SQL servers ? If so, is there
any article on what it is and how to set it up ? Thanks
>
> Wanted to implement some fault tolerance and wanted to know if anyone of
> you'll have implemented NIC teaming on your SQL servers ? If so, is there
> any article on what it is and how to set it up ? Thanks
>
You might find the following information useful:
Using Redundant Network Cards
To ensure that users can access the data center, use redundant network
interface cards (NICs), and use NIC teaming to provide automatic failover
between the NICs in the event of a failure. NIC teaming combines two or
more physical NICs into a single logical NIC, which ensures that the data
center always has an active link to the network. To use NIC teaming,
connect each NIC card to a different switch on a different subnet. NIC
teaming requires software from the NIC vendor, and each NIC is configured
to use a common virtual IP address. When all NICs are working properly,
their combined bandwidth is pooled for increased performance. When a teamed
NIC begins to fail, the software stops using the failing NIC and routes all
network communication over the remaining NIC or NICs. This failover process
is transparent to the operating system and other devices on the network.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...y/harag04.mspx
Q. Is NIC teaming supported in a Server cluster?
A. Yes, however there are caveats. The use of NIC teaming on all cluster
networks concurrently is not supported. At least one of the cluster
networks that are enabled for internal communication between cluster nodes
must not be teamed. Typically, the un-teamed network is a private
interconnect dedicated to this type of communication. The use of NIC
teaming on other cluster networks is acceptable; however, if communication
problems occur on a teamed network, Microsoft Product Support Services may
require that teaming be disabled. If this action resolves the problem or
issue, then you must seek further assistance from the manufacturer of the
teaming solution.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro.../technologies/
clustering/sercsfaq.mspx
Eric Crdenas
Senior support professional
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

NIC teaming for SQL

Wanted to implement some fault tolerance and wanted to know if anyone of
you'll have implemented NIC teaming on your SQL servers ? If so, is there
any article on what it is and how to set it up ? Thanks>
> Wanted to implement some fault tolerance and wanted to know if anyone of
> you'll have implemented NIC teaming on your SQL servers ? If so, is there
> any article on what it is and how to set it up ? Thanks
>
--
You might find the following information useful:
Using Redundant Network Cards
To ensure that users can access the data center, use redundant network
interface cards (NICs), and use NIC teaming to provide automatic failover
between the NICs in the event of a failure. NIC teaming combines two or
more physical NICs into a single logical NIC, which ensures that the data
center always has an active link to the network. To use NIC teaming,
connect each NIC card to a different switch on a different subnet. NIC
teaming requires software from the NIC vendor, and each NIC is configured
to use a common virtual IP address. When all NICs are working properly,
their combined bandwidth is pooled for increased performance. When a teamed
NIC begins to fail, the software stops using the failing NIC and routes all
network communication over the remaining NIC or NICs. This failover process
is transparent to the operating system and other devices on the network.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oy/harag04.mspx
Q. Is NIC teaming supported in a Server cluster?
A. Yes, however there are caveats. The use of NIC teaming on all cluster
networks concurrently is not supported. At least one of the cluster
networks that are enabled for internal communication between cluster nodes
must not be teamed. Typically, the un-teamed network is a private
interconnect dedicated to this type of communication. The use of NIC
teaming on other cluster networks is acceptable; however, if communication
problems occur on a teamed network, Microsoft Product Support Services may
require that teaming be disabled. If this action resolves the problem or
issue, then you must seek further assistance from the manufacturer of the
teaming solution.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...3/technologies/
clustering/sercsfaq.mspx
Eric Crdenas
Senior support professional
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

NIC teaming for SQL

Wanted to implement some fault tolerance and wanted to know if anyone of
you'll have implemented NIC teaming on your SQL servers ? If so, is there
any article on what it is and how to set it up ? Thanks>
> Wanted to implement some fault tolerance and wanted to know if anyone of
> you'll have implemented NIC teaming on your SQL servers ? If so, is there
> any article on what it is and how to set it up ? Thanks
>
--
You might find the following information useful:
Using Redundant Network Cards
To ensure that users can access the data center, use redundant network
interface cards (NICs), and use NIC teaming to provide automatic failover
between the NICs in the event of a failure. NIC teaming combines two or
more physical NICs into a single logical NIC, which ensures that the data
center always has an active link to the network. To use NIC teaming,
connect each NIC card to a different switch on a different subnet. NIC
teaming requires software from the NIC vendor, and each NIC is configured
to use a common virtual IP address. When all NICs are working properly,
their combined bandwidth is pooled for increased performance. When a teamed
NIC begins to fail, the software stops using the failing NIC and routes all
network communication over the remaining NIC or NICs. This failover process
is transparent to the operating system and other devices on the network.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/deploy/harag04.mspx
Q. Is NIC teaming supported in a Server cluster?
A. Yes, however there are caveats. The use of NIC teaming on all cluster
networks concurrently is not supported. At least one of the cluster
networks that are enabled for internal communication between cluster nodes
must not be teamed. Typically, the un-teamed network is a private
interconnect dedicated to this type of communication. The use of NIC
teaming on other cluster networks is acceptable; however, if communication
problems occur on a teamed network, Microsoft Product Support Services may
require that teaming be disabled. If this action resolves the problem or
issue, then you must seek further assistance from the manufacturer of the
teaming solution.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/windowsserver2003/technologies/
clustering/sercsfaq.mspx
--
Eric Cárdenas
Senior support professional
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

NIC Teaming ( Fault Tolerant Mode)

Has anyone had good or bad experiences with enabling NIC Teaming ..i.e. the
redundant method for your SQL Servers ? Any issues to be concerned with ?
Would like to hear from youll
ThanksGenerally, I haven't had/heard any problems. SQL Product Support Services
(PSS) may ask you to disable it as a troubleshooting step, especially in a
clustered environment if you open a support case, but otherwise I am unaware
of any concerns.
--
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:unCY6rM3EHA.524@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Has anyone had good or bad experiences with enabling NIC Teaming ..i.e.
the
> redundant method for your SQL Servers ? Any issues to be concerned with ?
> Would like to hear from youll
> Thanks
>

NIC Teaming ( Fault Tolerant Mode)

Has anyone had good or bad experiences with enabling NIC Teaming ..i.e. the
redundant method for your SQL Servers ? Any issues to be concerned with ?
Would like to hear from youll
Thanks
Generally, I haven't had/heard any problems. SQL Product Support Services
(PSS) may ask you to disable it as a troubleshooting step, especially in a
clustered environment if you open a support case, but otherwise I am unaware
of any concerns.
Geoff N. Hiten
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Senior Database Administrator
Careerbuilder.com
I support the Professional Association for SQL Server
www.sqlpass.org
"Hassan" <fatima_ja@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:unCY6rM3EHA.524@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Has anyone had good or bad experiences with enabling NIC Teaming ..i.e.
the
> redundant method for your SQL Servers ? Any issues to be concerned with ?
> Would like to hear from youll
> Thanks
>

NIC Teaming

I have a Dell 2850 that is being setup for a SQL database. In the past (for
example my Exchange 2003 server) I have had problems when teaming the NIC
cards on the server in a load balancing mode.
My question is, for SQL server (this server will also run IIS) where clients
will connect via a browser to view documents, what is the best method for
teaming the NIC's? Is there any benefit in using load balancing? When
dealing with my back-up server I have been told that teaming NIC cards for
load balancing does not improve bandwidth, if so what is the benefit for
teaming two NIC's for load balancing.
Thank You.A lot of the earlier teaming software had serious issues, and I got burned
resulting in me not using it for a long time. The newer generations are
pretty solid. I don't have any issues using it now. Just make sure you
have the lates BIOS and load balancing software.
There are several benefits of using load balancing of course. One, you have
more paths to push the data over. Two, you have more redundancy.
Typically, you never approach the maximum capacity of your NICs anyway if
you are using 1GB. The bottlenecks usually occur in other areas of the
system.
"mcwe_admin" <mcweadmin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:90F8DA61-CB2B-4E7A-BEA9-3716F403EF8A@.microsoft.com...
> I have a Dell 2850 that is being setup for a SQL database. In the past
(for
> example my Exchange 2003 server) I have had problems when teaming the NIC
> cards on the server in a load balancing mode.
> My question is, for SQL server (this server will also run IIS) where
clients
> will connect via a browser to view documents, what is the best method for
> teaming the NIC's? Is there any benefit in using load balancing? When
> dealing with my back-up server I have been told that teaming NIC cards for
> load balancing does not improve bandwidth, if so what is the benefit for
> teaming two NIC's for load balancing.
> Thank You.|||Would load-balancing be preferred over fault tolerance mode for a sql
database server running iis?
Thanks.
"Derrick Leggett" wrote:

> A lot of the earlier teaming software had serious issues, and I got burned
> resulting in me not using it for a long time. The newer generations a
re
> pretty solid. I don't have any issues using it now. Just make sure you
> have the lates BIOS and load balancing software.
> There are several benefits of using load balancing of course. One, you ha
ve
> more paths to push the data over. Two, you have more redundancy.
> Typically, you never approach the maximum capacity of your NICs anyway if
> you are using 1GB. The bottlenecks usually occur in other areas of the
> system.
>
> "mcwe_admin" <mcweadmin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:90F8DA61-CB2B-4E7A-BEA9-3716F403EF8A@.microsoft.com...
> (for
> clients
>
>|||Not if you don't need it. If you're not getting and network latency or wait
times, then just stick with fault tolerance. There's no reason to introduce
more variables into the equation if you don't need them.
The bigger issue is running IIS on the database server. I wouldn't mind
this for a reporting database server, but would try my hardest to avoid it
on the main, critical production database servers of a corporation if I
could avoid it.
"mcwe_admin" <mcweadmin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4332A3FA-489E-4FE6-B439-8DC77DBD47BF@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Would load-balancing be preferred over fault tolerance mode for a sql
> database server running iis?
> Thanks.
> "Derrick Leggett" wrote:
>
burned[vbcol=seagreen]
are[vbcol=seagreen]
have[vbcol=seagreen]
if[vbcol=seagreen]
past[vbcol=seagreen]
NIC[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]
When[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]|||Note that there is only about 100 users that will be accessing this server,
IIS will be needed as the front end for the database. With this amount of
users do you think that I would need a seperate server for IIS?
The server is a Dell 2850, dual processor with 2 Gig of Ram.
What types of problems do you think could occur?
Thanks.
"Derrick Leggett" wrote:

> Not if you don't need it. If you're not getting and network latency or wa
it
> times, then just stick with fault tolerance. There's no reason to introdu
ce
> more variables into the equation if you don't need them.
> The bigger issue is running IIS on the database server. I wouldn't mi
nd
> this for a reporting database server, but would try my hardest to avoid it
> on the main, critical production database servers of a corporation if I
> could avoid it.
>
> "mcwe_admin" <mcweadmin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4332A3FA-489E-4FE6-B439-8DC77DBD47BF@.microsoft.com...
> burned
> are
> have
> if
> past
> NIC
> for
> When
> for
> for
>
>

NIC Teaming

I have a Dell 2850 that is being setup for a SQL database. In the past (for
example my Exchange 2003 server) I have had problems when teaming the NIC
cards on the server in a load balancing mode.
My question is, for SQL server (this server will also run IIS) where clients
will connect via a browser to view documents, what is the best method for
teaming the NIC's? Is there any benefit in using load balancing? When
dealing with my back-up server I have been told that teaming NIC cards for
load balancing does not improve bandwidth, if so what is the benefit for
teaming two NIC's for load balancing.
Thank You.
A lot of the earlier teaming software had serious issues, and I got burned
resulting in me not using it for a long time. The newer generations are
pretty solid. I don't have any issues using it now. Just make sure you
have the lates BIOS and load balancing software.
There are several benefits of using load balancing of course. One, you have
more paths to push the data over. Two, you have more redundancy.
Typically, you never approach the maximum capacity of your NICs anyway if
you are using 1GB. The bottlenecks usually occur in other areas of the
system.
"mcwe_admin" <mcweadmin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:90F8DA61-CB2B-4E7A-BEA9-3716F403EF8A@.microsoft.com...
> I have a Dell 2850 that is being setup for a SQL database. In the past
(for
> example my Exchange 2003 server) I have had problems when teaming the NIC
> cards on the server in a load balancing mode.
> My question is, for SQL server (this server will also run IIS) where
clients
> will connect via a browser to view documents, what is the best method for
> teaming the NIC's? Is there any benefit in using load balancing? When
> dealing with my back-up server I have been told that teaming NIC cards for
> load balancing does not improve bandwidth, if so what is the benefit for
> teaming two NIC's for load balancing.
> Thank You.
|||Would load-balancing be preferred over fault tolerance mode for a sql
database server running iis?
Thanks.
"Derrick Leggett" wrote:

> A lot of the earlier teaming software had serious issues, and I got burned
> resulting in me not using it for a long time. The newer generations are
> pretty solid. I don't have any issues using it now. Just make sure you
> have the lates BIOS and load balancing software.
> There are several benefits of using load balancing of course. One, you have
> more paths to push the data over. Two, you have more redundancy.
> Typically, you never approach the maximum capacity of your NICs anyway if
> you are using 1GB. The bottlenecks usually occur in other areas of the
> system.
>
> "mcwe_admin" <mcweadmin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:90F8DA61-CB2B-4E7A-BEA9-3716F403EF8A@.microsoft.com...
> (for
> clients
>
>
|||Not if you don't need it. If you're not getting and network latency or wait
times, then just stick with fault tolerance. There's no reason to introduce
more variables into the equation if you don't need them.
The bigger issue is running IIS on the database server. I wouldn't mind
this for a reporting database server, but would try my hardest to avoid it
on the main, critical production database servers of a corporation if I
could avoid it.
"mcwe_admin" <mcweadmin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4332A3FA-489E-4FE6-B439-8DC77DBD47BF@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> Would load-balancing be preferred over fault tolerance mode for a sql
> database server running iis?
> Thanks.
> "Derrick Leggett" wrote:
burned[vbcol=seagreen]
are[vbcol=seagreen]
have[vbcol=seagreen]
if[vbcol=seagreen]
past[vbcol=seagreen]
NIC[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]
When[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]
for[vbcol=seagreen]
|||Note that there is only about 100 users that will be accessing this server,
IIS will be needed as the front end for the database. With this amount of
users do you think that I would need a seperate server for IIS?
The server is a Dell 2850, dual processor with 2 Gig of Ram.
What types of problems do you think could occur?
Thanks.
"Derrick Leggett" wrote:

> Not if you don't need it. If you're not getting and network latency or wait
> times, then just stick with fault tolerance. There's no reason to introduce
> more variables into the equation if you don't need them.
> The bigger issue is running IIS on the database server. I wouldn't mind
> this for a reporting database server, but would try my hardest to avoid it
> on the main, critical production database servers of a corporation if I
> could avoid it.
>
> "mcwe_admin" <mcweadmin@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:4332A3FA-489E-4FE6-B439-8DC77DBD47BF@.microsoft.com...
> burned
> are
> have
> if
> past
> NIC
> for
> When
> for
> for
>
>