Some stuff calls it bonded, sometimes it’s teamed, sometimes LAGed or aggregated or bundled or link channelled or ethertrunked or smartgrouped or Multi-link trunked etc. etc.
Bonded ethernet ports are for redundancy and concurrency, which is not quite additional bandwidth. (Just calling that out to help squash any misconceptions of how bonding works. It is technically more bandwidth, but you won’t see total throughput of the two links unless you are transferring multiple files.)
Separate network for NAS or local services. Or
bridgedbonded for more bandwidthBonded is more bandwidth. Bridged is just letting traffic flow between them.
Why does this have so many names?
Some stuff calls it bonded, sometimes it’s teamed, sometimes LAGed or aggregated or bundled or link channelled or ethertrunked or smartgrouped or Multi-link trunked etc. etc.
Thanks, that is what I meant
Bonded ethernet ports are for redundancy and concurrency, which is not quite additional bandwidth. (Just calling that out to help squash any misconceptions of how bonding works. It is technically more bandwidth, but you won’t see total throughput of the two links unless you are transferring multiple files.)
The bonding I guess is fair game… But a bit odd if you only have a 2.5g and 1g ports… You would probably want those symmetrical.
But separate networks? Have you considered VLANs?
Once you’ve bonded what do you use that speed for? There’s no way my hard drive can handle 3.5G write speed.
Network speeds are GBit, not GByte. A single HDD already saturates a 2.5G port
See raid0 (but be safe and do raid 1+0). Also maybe it’s a server, so read speed is more important (usually).
Also for bridging