I am planning a new installation of two 6500 Appliances in a ClusterXL deployment. The Appliances will each be connected to a VPC-Domain consisting of two Nexus 9K.
I would like to create a BOND / LACP Interface on each Appliance, where NIC 1 is connected to VPC Member 1 and NIC 2 is connected to VPC Member 2. The goal of this approach would be to increase bandwith and to increase resilience (I would like to update one VPC Member without failing over the firewall cluster).
My question: Shall I configure the bond interface as HA or can I use Load Sharing? According to the R80.20 Admin Guide and ClusterXL Guide, both are valid configurations. The thing I don't understand is that one supports "switch redundancy" and the other not:
- High Availability (Active/Backup): Gives redundancy when there is an interface or a link failure. This strategy also supports switch redundancy. Bond High Availability works in Active/Backup mode - interface Active/Standby mode. When an Active slave interface is down, the connection automatically fails over to the primary slave interface. If the primary slave interface is not available, the connection fails over to a different slave interface.
- Load Sharing (Active/Active): All slave interfaces in the UP state are used simultaneously. Traffic is distributed among the slave interfaces to maximize throughput. Bond Load Sharing does not support switch redundancy
Unfortunately I can't find any further explenation about this. What is meant with 'switch redundancy' in this context? Logically the VPC-Domain acts as a single Switch anyway....
Thanks for your help and many greetings from Germany.