https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ElasticXL-Bond-Aggregate-Behavior/m-p/249556#M48744 <P>Hi everyone,</P><P>I’m hoping someone with experience in ElasticXL clustering can shed some light on how bonding/aggregation works in this setup.</P><P>Let’s say we have a two-member cluster, and each member has a bond configured on a single port (e.g., eth1) using 802.3ad (LACP). Both eth1 interfaces are then connected to a single switch, with the corresponding two switch ports also configured for LACP.</P><P>However, this setup is causing an error on the switch—one of the LACP ports gets disabled. I initially assumed that since the SMO for the cluster was configured to bond on eth1, it would sync across the cluster nodes, effectively creating a shared bond using both eth1 interfaces.</P><P>This is our first time working with cluster technology, so apologies if this is a basic question. Any clarification or insights on the correct bonding approach in this scenario would be greatly appreciated.</P><P>Thanks in advance!</P> Thu, 22 May 2025 02:14:02 GMT Kit_E 2025-05-22T02:14:02Z https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ElasticXL-Bond-Aggregate-Behavior/m-p/249556#M48744 <P>Hi everyone,</P><P>I’m hoping someone with experience in ElasticXL clustering can shed some light on how bonding/aggregation works in this setup.</P><P>Let’s say we have a two-member cluster, and each member has a bond configured on a single port (e.g., eth1) using 802.3ad (LACP). Both eth1 interfaces are then connected to a single switch, with the corresponding two switch ports also configured for LACP.</P><P>However, this setup is causing an error on the switch—one of the LACP ports gets disabled. I initially assumed that since the SMO for the cluster was configured to bond on eth1, it would sync across the cluster nodes, effectively creating a shared bond using both eth1 interfaces.</P><P>This is our first time working with cluster technology, so apologies if this is a basic question. Any clarification or insights on the correct bonding approach in this scenario would be greatly appreciated.</P><P>Thanks in advance!</P> Thu, 22 May 2025 02:14:02 GMT https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ElasticXL-Bond-Aggregate-Behavior/m-p/249556#M48744 Kit_E 2025-05-22T02:14:02Z https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ElasticXL-Bond-Aggregate-Behavior/m-p/249557#M48745 <P>The bond configuration is sync'd to each cluster member, but the bonds on each cluster member are individual bonds. So in your case, you have two separate LACP bonds with one interface in each, and your switch configuration needs to change to reflect this.</P> Thu, 22 May 2025 02:53:43 GMT https://community.checkpoint.com/t5/Firewall-and-Security-Management/ElasticXL-Bond-Aggregate-Behavior/m-p/249557#M48745 emmap 2025-05-22T02:53:43Z