Ethernet Channel setup in AIX

Most of the guides and websites recommend to use smitty to create the initial setup. The two basic steps smitty etherchannel and smitty chinet or smitty mktcpip.
As for command line, I found two methods:
and here: 

Step 1a is the same in both (gateway could be used as a ping-to-host):# mkdev -c adapter -s pseudo -t ibm_ech -a adapter_names=entX \
-a backup_adapter=entY -a netaddr=PING2HOST \
-a num_retries=3 -a retry_time=30

Step 1b (for link aggregation and with jumbo frames enabled):

mkdev -c adapter -s pseudo -t ibm_ech -a ‘adapter_names=entX,entY’ \
– a ‘use_jumbo_frame=yes’ -a ‘mode=8023ad’

Then they differ a bit
One option adds the following step, not sure why:
/usr/lib/methods/defif >/dev/null 2>/dev/null

If it is not the initial network setup like for creating an additional network:
mkdev -c if -s EN -t en -a netaddr=IPaddress \
-a netmask=NETMASK -w IF(en newly created) -a state=up -a arp=on

mkdev -l inet0 (makes it available)

and for the initial network set up

mktcpip -h HOSTNAME -a IPaddress -m NETMASK -i IF(newly created) \

Find the etherchannel adapters:
lsdev -Cc adapter -t ibm_ech
show the configuration:
lsattr -El entX



a few things changed since I posted something last (waaay back then). For a while I was a contractor and a full time employee at IBM. Right now I am neither.

What I am trying to do (or what I am thinking about it) adding some content to this blog while I am trying to deepen my knowledge about AIX and Oracle.

I know there are some amazing blogs already out there and I will link to some of them over time, but I do hope to add to that knowledge base.



Listening to Queen of the stone Age:  Vampyre of Time and Memory

What will IBM do?

There is a rumour that IBM might buy Juniper Networks. Met a Juniper employee yesterday, he mentioned that IBM oems their boxes. So IBM already puts its name on their boxes – so why not put the name on everything…

Read an article some days ago, that says it will happen in 2010. Good luck Juniper. As soon as switches will become (if they already aren’t) low margin items, IBM will sell you to Lenovo …

One Empire strikes back

Have been wondering lately what HP or IBM will be doing since Cisco tries to step of their toes. How at least one puzzle has been solved. HP is buying 3Com. So is IBM after Brocade then, and will they get get beaten by Oracle again? The answer is probably around the corner.

One thing though works out quite nicely, if you plan to do a network oriented startup, you have more buyers you can choose from, not just Cisco.

But what about those companies that are not able to buy themselves a switch company – what if Dell can’t find anyone?  EMC is moving closer to Cisco, although that – they will say – doesn’t mean much, and they will claim to be best partners. Dell is still selling EMC hardware and probably plenty of it. And they still sell plenty of 3Com and Cisco hardware as well. But if virtualization is the driving force, they better get their story right. Virtualization is affecting the whole stack – from storage and the network all the way through to the server.

There is only little impact on the short term, but long term it might become difficult for Dell and similar companies. Long term might depend much more on how Microsoft will succeed with there Virtualization strategy anyways. As usual Microsoft is late, that is no surprise question is how strong of a push the will make. Currently they are the No 2 player in the VM market with about  a 4th of VMware’s marketshare.


Old Kids on the VBlock(tm)

Here is the official announcement.  The Register reports are here and here. This seems to be more than just the few slides I talked about a month or so ago. Quite a few companies are affected by that. The Register talks about the obvious ones. Smaller ones (Fujitsu, Rackable etc.) might get slammed. However, some big ones are out there, that we haven’t heard of. The question is: where is Microsoft?

All this infrastructure is nice, but it still is only infrastructure – a means to run applications. None of the application providers endorsed this venture yet. SAP or Symantec might, but it is hard to see Microsoft and especially Oracle to really appreciate this VCE (or EVC as The Register calls it). Oracle/Sun – it needs to happen sooner than later – will certainly make a point about the fact that it is about the apps.

BOT (build, operate, transfer) – as Chuck alludes is what this venture should deliver. They signed up a couple of big partners (mostly integrators and outsourcers). Many of those need a partnership like this, since IBM and HP are full systems providers and Dell tries to become one (They bought Perot Systems remember?).

Point here is that we know where HP, IBM stands, where Dell wants to be. We can assume, what Oracle/SUN think they should be. SAP happily runs on everything – they may wish they could run without a database., though. But where is Microsoft?

I would like to know…

Ooh I forgot one more name NetApp where will they go?

VE – this time no C

Well, spent a few hours earlier today at a WMware event – one presentation by  VMware, the other one was done by their partner EMC. It is interesting to see how they try to portrait VMware as independent from EMC. Kinda cute. The EMC presentation was mostly about what their EMC Ionix division has to offer. Of course VMware vCenter works nicely with almost all the software EMC offers. What was more striking was the fact that Cisco and its UCS was mentioned more than once. Makes me think that these companies get along quite well and they intend to keep that way. For now there is very little overlap between Cisco and EMC – unlike say HP, which is on its way to become a complete systems provider as well. With that I mean switches, storage and the whole software stack (what once was opsware).

VMware didn’t try to tip toe around the Oracle support question – they faced it head-on. They tried to portrait it as mostly FUD. Technically  – I think – smaller DB installation shouldn’t be a problem. And as far as RAC goes, I would ask why? Why would anybody try to run RAC in a virtualized environment. If it is running leave it alone (I would say). keep it simple keep it clean. You what this thing up 100% – and you paid dearly for that.

This whole support drama makes you wonder what will happen with MySQL when the SUN acquisition is done.

One thing they didn’t mention is licensing. It – in theory – prohibits anybody from taking advantage of one apparent feature of virtualization. Since  they only support OVM – again in theory, as I don’t have any specifics – a VMware customer might need to pay for all the CPU/Cores Oracle is running on and it doesn’t really matter how the VM is configured. That depends of course on the licensing the customer is using.

Reminds me on something Oracle was doing to Clusterware vendors – if you run another clusterware under Oracle you need to pay Enterprise licensing there you have it – It probably did really matter as most of the customers that run clusters had deep pockets anyways and the Oracle sales person was more than happy to sell an Enterprise license. But it was especially made for another vendor that started with a V – Veri something ….