For more information regarding the security incident at F5, the actions we are taking to address it, and our ongoing efforts to protect our customers, click here.

Forum Discussion

Kevin_Davies_40's avatar
Kevin_Davies_40
Icon for Nacreous rankNacreous
Oct 25, 2015

F5 BIGIP VE Traffic exceeds %75

I am seeing some strange behaviour from my virtual edition running under VMware ESXi. This device is not even in production and yet I am getting warning messages like the following. We are just doing...
chuffaker_11557's avatar
chuffaker_11557
Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
Feb 18, 2016

We are experiencing this issue in 6 different clusters... It doesn't look like 12.0 resolved the issue. Do you know if there are plans to have it resolved in the 12.1 release?

 

Additionally, if the only workaround available at this time is to avoid promiscuous mode on the vSwitch, then we could no longer use MAC Masquerading. Right? If that is the case, then we really don't have a use for failover in a VE environment.

 

  • Kevin_Davies_40's avatar
    Kevin_Davies_40
    Icon for Nacreous rankNacreous
    Feb 18, 2016
    You would have to raise case with F5 to get an answer on that.
  • Baron_of_Strath's avatar
    Baron_of_Strath
    Historic F5 Account
    May 09, 2016
    Not true. There is no requirement to use mac masquerading to get failover working properly. There is a gratuitous arp sent when the failover occurs so the switch should update. Mac Masquerading was developed to decrease traffic on the wire ( ARPs) when the failover occurs. With Mac Masquerading, you will need to insure that the switch won't complain if the mac address floats from virtual port to virtual port. I am not aware of any of my customers using mac masquerading.