<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/atom10full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:openSearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/" xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:gd="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" gd:etag="W/&quot;DU8GRHcycSp7ImA9WhRRFE4.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641</id><updated>2011-11-28T00:50:25.999+01:00</updated><category term="virtualization" /><category term="performance" /><category term="servers" /><category term="networking" /><category term="vmware" /><category term="san" /><category term="insight" /><title>Kukacz Notes</title><subtitle type="html">Some remarks from my daily life with servers, storage and virtualization.</subtitle><link rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><generator version="7.00" uri="http://www.blogger.com">Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>10</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>25</openSearch:itemsPerPage><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/KukaczNotes" /><feedburner:info uri="kukacznotes" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DEACRHc6cSp7ImA9WxVSE08.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-5341510929208958406</id><published>2009-01-07T11:10:00.010+01:00</published><updated>2009-01-07T12:12:45.919+01:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2009-01-07T12:12:45.919+01:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="virtualization" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="insight" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="san" /><title>Insight 6 - Features I Believe Will Bring New Benefits of Virtualization</title><summary>This post is one of a series of insights I wrote for the Techdirt Insight Community and which were published on Virtualization Conversation site, sponsored by IBM and Intel.   The common concept of server virtualization has grown through breaking new technologies before years to a point today, when server virtualization vendors tend to implement similar features with minor innovation. There are </summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/5341510929208958406/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=5341510929208958406" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/5341510929208958406?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/5341510929208958406?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/MAbSNKexZgk/features-i-believe-will-bring-new.html" title="Insight 6 - Features I Believe Will Bring New Benefits of Virtualization" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2009/01/features-i-believe-will-bring-new.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DE8GR3Y5fCp7ImA9WxVSE08.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-3541749971211787442</id><published>2008-06-12T00:00:00.003+02:00</published><updated>2009-01-07T12:13:46.824+01:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2009-01-07T12:13:46.824+01:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="insight" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="san" /><title>Insight 5 - Storage Virtualization - Where Should It Go?</title><summary>This post is one of a series of insights I wrote for the Techdirt Insight Community and which were published on The Future of Storage webpage, sponsored by Dell.                          Writing about storage virtualization, I should start by defining which virtualization I mean. Generally, a simple RAID volume can be called “virtual” too as it is a logical representation of some more complex </summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/3541749971211787442/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=3541749971211787442" title="1 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/3541749971211787442?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/3541749971211787442?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/q55VpsMqK_o/insight-5-storage-virtualization-where.html" title="Insight 5 - Storage Virtualization - Where Should It Go?" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><thr:total>1</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/06/insight-5-storage-virtualization-where.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DE8ARH44fCp7ImA9WxVSE08.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-3397623141341397572</id><published>2008-06-05T00:00:00.004+02:00</published><updated>2009-01-07T12:14:05.034+01:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2009-01-07T12:14:05.034+01:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="insight" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="san" /><title>Insight 4 - Will Non-Rotational Drives Create A New SAN Era?</title><summary>                          This post is one of a series of insights I wrote for the Techdirt Insight Community and which were published on The Future of Storage webpage, sponsored by Dell.This community has forced me to think of what the next big things in storage areas could be. At first, I thought of protocols, so I wrote an insight about mirroring and some feature-related things. What I forgot </summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/3397623141341397572/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=3397623141341397572" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/3397623141341397572?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/3397623141341397572?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/NJ6MIpjDPF8/insight-4-will-non-rotational-drives.html" title="Insight 4 - Will Non-Rotational Drives Create A New SAN Era?" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/06/insight-4-will-non-rotational-drives.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DE8CQ3Y7eyp7ImA9WxVSE08.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-776727797664755557</id><published>2008-05-29T00:00:00.002+02:00</published><updated>2009-01-07T12:14:22.803+01:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2009-01-07T12:14:22.803+01:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="insight" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="san" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="networking" /><title>Insight 3 - I Don’t Believe In FCoE</title><summary>                          This post is one of a series of insights I wrote for the Techdirt Insight Community and which were published on The Future of Storage webpage, sponsored by Dell.I don’t believe in FCoE. I don’t believe in a storage protocol built from the first layer up. I don’t believe in people needing another set of adapters, switches and controllers. I just see a bunch of vendors </summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/776727797664755557/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=776727797664755557" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/776727797664755557?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/776727797664755557?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/6x5cgyVEo6w/insight-3-i-dont-believe-in-fcoe.html" title="Insight 3 - I Don’t Believe In FCoE" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/05/insight-3-i-dont-believe-in-fcoe.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DE8DQns7eip7ImA9WxVSE08.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-2537522882106757811</id><published>2008-05-22T00:00:00.002+02:00</published><updated>2009-01-07T12:14:33.502+01:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2009-01-07T12:14:33.502+01:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="insight" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="san" /><title>Insight 2 - Mirroring vs. Replication for Disaster Recovery</title><summary>                          This post is one of a series of insights I wrote for the Techdirt Insight Community and which were published on The Future of Storage webpage, sponsored by Dell.As I wrote in my first insight, I’m a technician at a VAR company working with many clients on their SAN setups. We’ve been quite successful selling storage solutions with synchronous mirroring to our clients in </summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/2537522882106757811/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=2537522882106757811" title="3 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/2537522882106757811?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/2537522882106757811?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/kcOzxfw0OQU/insight-2-mirroring-vs-replication-for.html" title="Insight 2 - Mirroring vs. Replication for Disaster Recovery" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><thr:total>3</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/05/insight-2-mirroring-vs-replication-for.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;Ck4DRX49fip7ImA9WxdSEEw.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-2260601835367819030</id><published>2008-05-17T00:31:00.005+02:00</published><updated>2008-05-17T09:56:14.066+02:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2008-05-17T09:56:14.066+02:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="vmware" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="san" /><title>Lost Datastore - Have You Seen A Snapshot Warning?</title><summary> I saw a sad story last week. A client starting with VMware ESX called us to help them find their lost virtual machines. They used to store all their virtual machines in a single VMFS datastore on a Fibre Channel array. Usually, when we experience such problem, it's being caused by some change in LUN mapping or FC paths resulting in datastore invisible in ESX. In this case it was different, </summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/2260601835367819030/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=2260601835367819030" title="12 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/2260601835367819030?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/2260601835367819030?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/t7uGAx-sMn4/lost-datastore-have-you-seen-snapshot.html" title="Lost Datastore - Have You Seen A Snapshot Warning?" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" url="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SC4Ks2ey_GI/AAAAAAAAAGU/I3xzias9JQg/s72-c/dialog-rewrite_warning.png" height="72" width="72" /><thr:total>12</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/05/lost-datastore-have-you-seen-snapshot.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DE8MR3gyfSp7ImA9WxVSE08.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-2413338096344652417</id><published>2008-05-10T00:00:00.012+02:00</published><updated>2009-01-07T12:14:46.695+01:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2009-01-07T12:14:46.695+01:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="insight" /><title>Insight 1 - My View on Current SAN Solutions</title><summary>                          This post is one of a series of insights I wrote for the Techdirt Insight Community and which were published on The Future of Storage webpage, sponsored by Dell.Introduction - VMware's Impact My point of view is based on what I’m doing daily - consulting SAN projects in their presales phase and leading SAN installations in a storage reseller company in Czech Republic (EU</summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/2413338096344652417/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=2413338096344652417" title="1 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/2413338096344652417?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/2413338096344652417?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/y87JKX8rlP0/insight-1-my-view-on-current-san.html" title="Insight 1 - My View on Current SAN Solutions" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><thr:total>1</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/05/insight-1-my-view-on-current-san.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DkcHQ3s8eyp7ImA9WxdSEE4.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-8896487155810447583</id><published>2008-05-08T21:45:00.015+02:00</published><updated>2008-05-17T16:20:32.573+02:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2008-05-17T16:20:32.573+02:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="vmware" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="servers" /><title>How to upgrade DRAC firmware through TFTP</title><summary>Few days ago we needed to upgrade firmware of few Dell PowerEdge 2950 servers. My colleague did most of the work on servers running Windows using Dell Server Update Utility DVD. I had to do the same on an ESX 3.5 server. Sadly, I found the CD was not bootable. Dell expects you are running some of supported OSs before you start doing firmware upgrades.The SUU DVD includes a suu utility for Linux </summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/8896487155810447583/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=8896487155810447583" title="6 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/8896487155810447583?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/8896487155810447583?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/Bk9FaikLumI/how-to-upgrade-drac-firmware-with-tftp.html" title="How to upgrade DRAC firmware through TFTP" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><thr:total>6</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/05/how-to-upgrade-drac-firmware-with-tftp.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;C0MBRHYzeCp7ImA9WxdTFkw.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-4033902911698731428</id><published>2008-04-10T23:27:00.020+02:00</published><updated>2008-05-12T18:57:35.880+02:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2008-05-12T18:57:35.880+02:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="performance" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="vmware" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="networking" /><title>Teaming NICs in ESX - configuration</title><summary>This article is continuation of Teaming NICs in ESX - how to choose a switch?VMware ESX Server's default one-way load balancing of outgoing traffic is quite sufficient feature for applications (VMs) sending major amount of data to multiple network clients while only receiving small size transfers. That's a common case for web servers or mail clients.There are applications however, which also need</summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/4033902911698731428/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=4033902911698731428" title="14 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/4033902911698731428?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/4033902911698731428?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/Gshb1up65A0/teaming-nics-in-esx-configuration.html" title="Teaming NICs in ESX - configuration" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" url="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/R_qL-Ngc35I/AAAAAAAAAEo/sZC5Pc2MII8/s72-c/vSwitch-vmnics.png" height="72" width="72" /><thr:total>14</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/04/teaming-nics-in-esx-configuration.html</feedburner:origLink></entry><entry gd:etag="W/&quot;DkUHRH88fCp7ImA9WxdREUU.&quot;"><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3584514429482897641.post-4080113318981268703</id><published>2008-04-02T22:47:00.011+02:00</published><updated>2008-05-30T23:50:35.174+02:00</updated><app:edited xmlns:app="http://www.w3.org/2007/app">2008-05-30T23:50:35.174+02:00</app:edited><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="performance" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="vmware" /><category scheme="http://www.blogger.com/atom/ns#" term="networking" /><title>Teaming NICs in ESX - how to choose a switch?</title><summary>By default, ESX server balances all outgoing traffic based on IP address pair through multiple NIC ports configured in a single vSwitch. You don't need any switch support for this feature to work.You need the switch-level support however to let both the outgoing and incoming traffic to be balanced and thus receive increased overall throughput.So, how do you choose a suitable switch:You can use </summary><link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://kukacz.blogspot.com/feeds/4080113318981268703/comments/default" title="Post Comments" /><link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3584514429482897641&amp;postID=4080113318981268703" title="0 Comments" /><link rel="edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/4080113318981268703?v=2" /><link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.blogger.com/feeds/3584514429482897641/posts/default/4080113318981268703?v=2" /><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/KukaczNotes/~3/d8teMa4uqpk/teaming-nics-in-esx-how-to-choose.html" title="Teaming NICs in ESX - how to choose a switch?" /><author><name>LUKAS KUBIN</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail" width="21" height="32" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SY8OMaTgFAI/AAAAAAAABkM/9wLrsGrI0zw/S220/kukacz2.jpg" /></author><media:thumbnail xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" url="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_8TMjVE-YFtU/SDrGeMinA0I/AAAAAAAAAGc/td5NM9jPw0Q/s72-c/mbps_vs_iops.png" height="72" width="72" /><thr:total>0</thr:total><feedburner:origLink>http://kukacz.blogspot.com/2008/04/teaming-nics-in-esx-how-to-choose.html</feedburner:origLink></entry></feed>

