Dual NICs and/or NIC teaming

I have a client that is having several networking issues: roaming profiles
aren't working, logons are really slow and a database keeps locking up. On a
hunch, I suspected the NIC was the bottleneck. Perfmon proved me correct.
The Bytes Total/Second and Bytes Transmitted/Second counters are both
constantly getting pegged at 100%.

In order to increase the amount of network traffic that this box can handle,
I want to add a second NIC. My question is, would I be better off adding a
second NIC as a standalone and making the box multi-homed or adding the
second NIC and teaming it with the first?

I can easily buy two new NICs so they are both the same make and model. I
just am not sure which would be the best approach to take.

Thanks.

You will have less problems by teaming or load balancing than to add another
nic with another IP on the same subnet. I would imagine an issue like this
on a fairly large network or a server that is trying to do too much. Be
careful when you buy your NICS as there are only certain ones that will do
what you want and the manufacturer has to have the appropriate drivers to
perform teaming/balancing.

--
Scott Harding
MCSE, MCSA, A+, Network+
Microsoft MVP - Windows NT Server

"ARM123" <adam(removethis)@amiceli.com> wrote in message
news:upKI%(E-Mail Removed)...
> I have a client that is having several networking issues: roaming profiles
> aren't working, logons are really slow and a database keeps locking up. On
a
> hunch, I suspected the NIC was the bottleneck. Perfmon proved me correct.
> The Bytes Total/Second and Bytes Transmitted/Second counters are both
> constantly getting pegged at 100%.
>
> In order to increase the amount of network traffic that this box can
handle,
> I want to add a second NIC. My question is, would I be better off adding a
> second NIC as a standalone and making the box multi-homed or adding the
> second NIC and teaming it with the first?
>
> I can easily buy two new NICs so they are both the same make and model. I
> just am not sure which would be the best approach to take.
>
> Thanks.
>
>

Thanks Scott -

Yes, the better solution would be to move some of the resources off that
box, which I ultimately plan to do. Until then, I think this is my best
workaround. I will go with the NIC teaming as opposed to having two separate
NICs w/ separate IPs.

I am looking at the Intel PRO/1000 MT or Intel PRO/100 S cards. The cards
actiually have two ports on them, which can be teamed.

"Scott Harding - MS MVP" <scrockel@**NO_SPAM**hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> You will have less problems by teaming or load balancing than to add
another
> nic with another IP on the same subnet. I would imagine an issue like this
> on a fairly large network or a server that is trying to do too much. Be
> careful when you buy your NICS as there are only certain ones that will do
> what you want and the manufacturer has to have the appropriate drivers to
> perform teaming/balancing.
>
> --
> Scott Harding
> MCSE, MCSA, A+, Network+
> Microsoft MVP - Windows NT Server
>
> "ARM123" <adam(removethis)@amiceli.com> wrote in message
> news:upKI%(E-Mail Removed)...
> > I have a client that is having several networking issues: roaming
profiles
> > aren't working, logons are really slow and a database keeps locking up.
On
> a
> > hunch, I suspected the NIC was the bottleneck. Perfmon proved me
correct.
> > The Bytes Total/Second and Bytes Transmitted/Second counters are both
> > constantly getting pegged at 100%.
> >
> > In order to increase the amount of network traffic that this box can
> handle,
> > I want to add a second NIC. My question is, would I be better off adding
a
> > second NIC as a standalone and making the box multi-homed or adding the
> > second NIC and teaming it with the first?
> >
> > I can easily buy two new NICs so they are both the same make and model.
I
> > just am not sure which would be the best approach to take.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
>
>