Ether Channel (port aggregation)

No matter LACP or PAgP is used, is it possible to do port aggregation on a Server with NIC 1 & NIC2 respectively connecting to different Switches which are then having the same uplink to higher level?
as follows : -
Server NIC # 1 ------ Switch #A ----\
---- LAN
NIC # 2 -------Switch # B ---/
My understanding is that it cannot, can it ?
Rgds,
Raymond.

THanks, that's what i'd been understanding, yet, someone else post me this answer, Quote,
For your case, the LAN switches won't care how you send out the packet, it just treat the two NICs as two NICs, your server need to deal with the packet/session aggregation. It works because we suppose your server don't have any STP issues.
Kind Regards,
Bong So
Professional Services, Equant HK
UNQuote
I shall test ... the actual case is happening with our being installed IBM BladeCenter Server, having the NIC1 and NIC2 internally wired to CIGESM switch 1 and 2; and the NIC's are Broadcom capable of using Virtual adapters in either modes, one which is LACP.
Thanks again.
Raymond.

Similar Messages

Ether channel between fiber optic ports any difference?

I will appreciate any help about the below questions.
there are two catalyst 4506 multilayer switches, Two SFP modules are installed on each switches for uplink purpose. (1000 Base SX fiber optic Gigabit ethernet SFP modules)
I want to connect two switches each other. Question is;
1.Can I bundle these two gigabit ports (ether channel) and get Two gigabit connection between switches ?
2.If I can do it, what happens if one of the lines fails?
I know I can configure ether channel between copper fast ethernet ports but I am not sure If I can benefit same feature for 1000 base SX fiber optic ports.
Thank you very much for helping :)

Hi Friend,
You can run a command "sh port capabilities " and that will how that whether that ports are capable of etherchannel or not.
Also AFAIK SFP ports are just the physical medium so it does not make a differece, they should be capable of etherchannel.
Also if one port of the channel goes down traffic will start trasversing through the other port so it will take care as redundancy. It will behave like other etherchannel which you cofnigure with copper ports.
HTH, if yes please rate the post.
Ankur

What is the maximum number of physical link we can bind to a ether-channel and port-channel

Hi,
I was studying about port-channel & ether-channel and found that, it can be bind up-to 8 ports. So maximum number, we can have of 8 ports or more ?
For binding we should have minimum of 2 ports or 1 ports will work ? For load-balancing purpose, is the port no. would be in a bundle of 2,4 and 8 ?
Thanks

Hi Kathik,
I have gone through one document. It's saying the below mentioned things :
Jun 7, 2012 9:36 PM (in response to Sarabjit)
Re: What is the maximum number of etherchannels we can have?
The maximum number of Etherchannels varies from platform to platform. The maximum number of ports in an etherchannel is either 8 ro 16 depending on the platform. The minimum number of ports in an etherchannel bundle is 1.
Jun 8, 2012 1:27 AM (in response to Sarabjit)
Re: What is the maximum number of etherchannels we can have?
Etherchannels is a Cisco term. Other vendors call them 802.3ad trunks. It's common to see something like this in datasheets:
48 ports 10/100/1000 Mbit/s
802.3ad:
Maximum of 32 groups
Maximum of 8 ports per group
The document url is https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/thread/43680
The another document says the below mentioned things :
Matrix of Load Balancing Methods
This matrix consolidates the load balancing methods that this document describes:
Platform
Address Used in XOR
Source-Based?
Destination-Based?
Source-Destination-Based?
Load Balancing Method—Configurable/Fixed?
6500/6000
Layer 2, Layer 3 addresses, Layer 4 information, or MPLS information2
Yes
Yes
Yes
Configurable
5500/5000
Layer 2 address only
Yes
Cannot change the method
4500/4000
Layer 2, Layer 3 addresses, or Layer 4 information
Yes
Yes
Yes
Configurable
2900XL/3500XL
Layer 2 address only
Yes
Yes
Configurable
3750/3560
Layer 2 or Layer 3 address only
Yes
Yes
Yes
Configurable
2950/2955/3550
Layer 2 address only1
Yes
Yes
—1
Configurable
1900/2820
These platforms use a special method of load balancing. See theCatalyst 1900/2820 section for details.
8500
Layer 3 address only
Yes
Cannot change the method
1 For the 3550 series switch, when source-MAC address forwarding is used, load distribution based on the source and destination IP address is also enabled for routed IP traffic. All routed IP traffic chooses a port based on the source and destination IP address.
2 For the 6500 series switches that run Cisco IOS, MPLS layer 2 information can also be used for load balancing MPLS packets.
The document url is http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/etherchannel/12023-4.html
Another document says the below mentioned things for load-balancing :
inally, here is full list of valid load-distribution methods:
•dst-ip—Load distribution on the destination IP address
•dst-mac—Load distribution on the destination MAC address
•dst-port—Load distribution on the destination TCP/UDP port
•src-dst-ip—Load distribution on the source XOR destination IP address
•src-dst-mac—Load distribution on the source XOR destination MAC address
•src-dst-port—Load distribution on the source XOR destination TCP/UDP port
•src-ip—Load distribution on the source IP address
•src-mac—Load distribution on the source MAC address
•src-port—Load distribution on the source port
The document url is https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/thread/63064
Please suggest.

Server Port Aggregation

Question: Is it possible to take an HP or Dell server with dual 1G Ethernet ports and create a 2G logical EtherChannel (port-channel interface) connection to a Catalyst switch (4948-10GB or 3750) that will give me a total 2G of usable bandwidth? I wouldn't expect to get exactly 2G of bandwidth, but I would like to get close.
I've seen a lot of examples creating EtherChannel connections from servers to Catalyst switches for the purpose of redundancy (in case one port/card/cable fails), but they are still only showing 1G of usable bandwidth.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the term 'aggregation', but I would expect this to mean that by aggregating 2 - 1G ports, I'd be getting 2G of bandwidth.
Cisco TAC is telling me differently. This is from a case I have openedâ¦
>
>From the case notes, I understand that you have a port channel with 2
>gigabit Ethernet ports. You stated that you are just getting 1 GB of
>throughput.
>
>I have to tell you that is perfectly normal and it is the way the ether
>channel works. Your configuration is perfect and everything seems to be ok.
>Let me explain why this is an expected behavior. The ether channel is not a
>feature to increase the throughput of your network or a link between two
>devices. This is a feature that improves the interfaces performance by
>avoiding the traffic to overwhelm one single interface. For example let say
>that you have a port channel of 5 ports this does not mean that you will
>have throughput of 5GB, what this means is that the traffic has 5 options to
>reach an specific device. Which means that you can split 1GB of throughput
>on 5 different interfaces depending of the algorithm you use. You can check
>the algorithm on the following link:
>
To restate my question(s)â¦
Can I get 2G of usable bandwidth from 2 - 1G ports on my server? Or is the TAC engineer right?
If the TAC engineer is wrong, does anyone have any examples/references to point me in the right direction?
Thanks!
Jeff

Nope he is right that is the way etherchannel works . A specific conversation will always go down 1 link depending on the the way the channel is configured , whether it be on source mac or ip or ip source destination . Say you have a 3 gig port etherchannel , this will divide up the total traffic across the ports instead of everything coming down 1 pipe but any one conversation traverses just 1 of those links so it has a total of 1 gig bandwidth to use minus whatever other traffic is already riding that port.

How to configure ether channel

Hi mates,
As far as I know, when you configure ether channel (PAGP/LACP) on two ports, they act like one port. but in reality packets are not sent through both ports. Only one of the ports is used until the actual link fails.
Question is:
I have two switches, each has two SFP ports, I want to connect two switches each other.
how can I make ether channel always use both ports when sending/transmitting packets? I remember it is possible.
thanks for helping :)

HI
i hope this link will help u .
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps663/products_configuration_example09186a0080094aec.shtml
when u create ether-channel it will automatically load balance based on source/destiantion mac address or source/destiantion ip address.
Thanks
Mahmood

ESW 540 and Ether Channels

We are trying to configure Ether Channels on our ESW 540 switches. We have configured the port(s) and made the physical connections but the Ether channel is only showing up at 1000M. It is my understanding that the port should be displaying at 2000M if configed with one pair of ports. Are there any other settings that need to be completed?
Thank you,
Brock

Is this forum inactive? Do I need to supply more information? Is this question not able to be answered?

2960-24TC Ether-Channel

Does anyone know if I can bundle the 4 SFP ports into ether-channel for a 4-gig uplink on a 2960-24TC?

YES, this is possible.
you must have the 2960G-24TC-L model.
this does have the four SFP uplink ports and YES, they can be configured in an etherchannel or trunk configuration.
please see the following link for more info on 2960 etherchannel configuration:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6406/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a00805a75e0.html

WiSM trunk/channel ports not operating correctly

New commands were added to 6500 IOS SXF6 to ease initial setup of the trunk and channel ports for the wism. Problem is after typing these commands I can't undo them. This is the "wism module <mod> controller 1 native-vlan" command.
After removing these commands and manually setting up the gig ports and channel/trunk the gig port are in a up/down state and the port channel is down/down. Seems like there is a disconnect between the automaticall created channel group with the new commands. It creates a channel numbered 288 or higher. You can then see this is somehow bound to the wism and it's ports.
Any ideas on how to fully remove the auto-assigned high port-channel interface? Or am I stuck doing it the auto way and I'll have to put the gig ports in the high channel-group?
sh wism module 4 controller 1 status
WiSM Controller 1 in Slot 4
Operational Status of the Controller : Oper-Up
Service VLAN : <snip>
Service Port : 9
Service Port Mac Address : <snip>
Service IP Address : <snip>
Management IP Address : <snip>
Software Version : 4.1.171.0
Port Channel Number : 289
Allowed vlan list : empty
Native VLAN ID : 1
WCP Keep Alive Missed : 0

service-port IPs need to be changed to a network address with the 1st octet completely different than any other interface on your controller. There should be only 1 controller listed in the mobility group with which will be the controller you are currently on. All othersshould have the name of your mobility group there

Ether Channel for WAN connection

We have 2 WAN connection from the ISP 2 links (155M and 300M) . We would like to perform a Etherchannel on this links.
Both the links termination are RJ45 to a Layer 3 switch. Can we configure Ether-Channel ? What is the condition for EtherChannel (eg no signalling from ISP) ?

If you're on an ethernet connection, you should be able to do etherchannel but like what the others have said, you're do not have the same speed for each, load-sharing wouldn't be optimal.
i'd rather do balancing via BGP by choosing what prefix gets advertised to a certain link, so I can at least maximize the two links. I have the same scenario before, I had 1 FastEthernet and 1 STM1 to a service provider, eBGP multihop load-share wouldn't cut it, I have to do manual prefix advertisement.
hope that helps.

STP vs. Ether Channel ; Which one is prefer?

Is Ether Channel an always prefer method comparing to STP? Why? Is there any scenario to use STP better than Ether Channel?

Hi,
Simply put Ether Channel is the technology to combine exisiting Ethernet links and achieving higher bandwidth which is otherwise restricted cause of Layer 2 limitation e.g. can you achieve 4 Gbps bandwidth using GBIC modules/interfaces? The ans is NO. In that case, Etherchannel will bundle all the four inidividual interfaces/GBICs and give you a bandwidth of 4 Gbps.
STP, on the other hand is a technology that will enable you to give a Fault-Tolerant situation when in a Looped environment.
If you require more info please feel free to revert back and I shall be glad to give you more info.
Hope it helps, if it does please rate.

How to configre Ether channel?

How to configre Ether channel?
1.5

HI
i hope this link will help u .
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps663/products_configuration_example09186a0080094aec.shtml
when u create ether-channel it will automatically load balance based on source/destiantion mac address or source/destiantion ip address.
Thanks
Mahmood

Port aggregation on different switches?

Hello all :)
I got a server PC with two fast ethernet NICs (NICS do support port aggregation)
I know you can connect two 100 Mbps ports of server to two fast ethernet ports of a switch, this way you get one 200 Mbps link. If one of the ports or one of the links fail, other link keeps working.
this is a vey nice redundancy.
My question is;
is it possible to bundle two fast ethernet ports of server to two different switches? (first ethernet port of PC to switch 1 and second ethernet port of PC to switch 2. switch 1 and switch 2 are connected each other with an uplink)
if possible, what is the CLI command for that?
thank you very much for helping.

Hello,
AFAIK, and unless something has changed very recently, the only way to link two (or more) switches together in a single Etherchannel is in a stack configuration.
Nortel appears to have a feature called Split MultiLink Trunking, which does multichassis trunking, you might want to have a look at the document below:
Layer 2 Trunking Availability Strategies using SMLT and DMLT
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.asp?p=169544&seqNum=3&rl=1
Regards,
GP

EtherChannel & Port Aggregation different ?!?

hi frens,
i quite confuse in the EtherChannel & Port Aggregation technology... and how they related in perform load balancing ??
Thanks
William

Hi William,
Etherchannel and Port Aggregation are two terms that mean the same thing. Etherchannel is 'Cisco terminology' and Port Aggregation and link bundling are generic terms.
HTH,
Bobby

Port aggregation over 2 or more switches?

I am currently using a HP1910 48 Port with Port Aggregation.
Is it possible to use this feature over 2 or more of these switches so that If one switch fails the other automatically comes into play?
Many than

Hi:
You may also want to post your question on the HP Business Support Forum -- Web and Unmanaged Switching section.
http://h30499.www3.hp.com/t5/Web-and-Unmanaged/bd-p/switching-v-series-forum#.VNN-33k5C9I

CSS 11500 Port Aggregation

Does the 11503 or 11506 support any sort of port aggregation, like etherchannel, to support larger pipes than 1Gb?
Thanks,
Patrick

The CSS does not support EtherChannel.
~Zach

Ether Channel (port aggregation)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for