Etherchannel Load balancing

I have three Gigabit aggregated with LACP to a IBM server. When I ask one ftp from this server I saw the performance is around 80 MB/s, if I ask two ftp to different equipmpents the performance is 160 MB/s (it uses 2 of the links of the bundle). However if I ask for three ftp the performance keeps in 160 MB/s although it uses the three links of the bundle. Is there a limit for Cisco? Anyone knows the reason? It seems like we can transmit as maximum at 160 MB/s

Glen is absolutely correct. on layer 2 switches EtherChannel load balancing can use either source-MAC or destination-MAC address forwarding.
With source-MAC address forwarding, when packets are forwarded to an EtherChannel, the packets are distributed across the ports in the channel based on the source-MAC address of the incoming packet. Therefore, to provide load balancing, packets from different hosts use different ports in the channel, but packets from the same host use the same port in the channel. With destination-MAC address forwarding, when packets are forwarded to an EtherChannel, the packets are distributed across the ports in the channel based on the destination host MAC address of the incoming packet. Therefore, packets to the same destination are forwarded over the same port, and packets to a different destination are sent on a different port in the channel.
So with every different source or destination mac it will use a diff link. If there is a session started on a aprticular link for a source to a destination it will keep on using the same link until the session termiantes or link goes down.
HTH, Please rate if it helps.
-amit singh

Similar Messages

  • Etherchannel Load-Balancing To Host (Confused)

    I'm a bit confused as to how an etherchannel load-balances traffic across all the links, in the port-channel.  If I have a 4 port etherchannel, to an AIX host, does the traffic load balance across all 4 ports?   In reading the load-balancing documentation, it states that a global configuration of src-mac forwards traffic from the same host, over the same port, all the time, whereas it forwards traffic over different ports for other hosts.  What if it's the same host tied into the port-channel?  So if my AIX box has 4 ethernet cards in a port channel, each ethernet card goes over only one link?  If the ethernet cards are bundled, into a port channel config, is there no way to load balance all the traffic?  Maybe I'm misunderstanding the etherchannel configuration and how it works.  Thanks for any and all help!!
    Dan

      Port channel is link aggregation for all traffic which will get distributed across all links.  A given ip conversation will only travel down one of those links at any given time. The single ip conversation is not carried say for instance across all 4 links if it's a 4 port etherchannel.

  • Etherchannel load balancing options

    Reading up on my Etherchannel load balancing options (src or dst, mac or IP) it seems to me that I don't have a good way of using Etherchannel to increase bandwidth in my situation. In my scenario, I have a Windows terminal server servicing a couple hundred users which are using a SQL database on a 2nd server. Both servers are on the same switch. Basically I only have one MAC and one IP. Is there a way to utilize multiple links in this scenario? It seems like I would need a packet based technique to take advantage of multiple channels and unfortunately that isn't an option with etherchannel. Thoughts?
    Thanks,
    Diego

    Hi Diego,
    If I understand you correctly, your scenario is similar to this
    200users--Switch===channel===Switch--Server1+2
    If that's how it is set up, then you have multiple source addresses with the same destination address. So if you select either 'source' or 'source and destination' as your frame distribution method, then you should have a pretty even distribution of traffic.
    HTH,
    Bobby
    *Please rate helpful posts.

  • Etherchannel Load-Balance

    Hi All,
    I have one Catalyst 6509 connected to Catalyst 4500X-VSS using a Layer 2 Etherchannel.
    So, 6509 are using src-dst-ip for Etherchannel Load Balance and 4500X are using src-dst-port.
    Anyone knows if this will work fine or if I may have some problem?
    Is recommended change that configuration or not?
    Tks.

    I agree with Karsten, That there would be any problem.
    As you know Etherchannel is kind of load sharing among the links...It has its own way of load sharing/balancing the traffic if you leave it to default. (which means you might end up using the same link most often times if you dont change the default load balancing method). Hence we see people change the default method to the one which they want and get the nearest load sharing/balancing over the links utilization.
    HTH
    REgards
    Inayath

  • IPS etherchannel load balancing design

    Is it possible to do a etherchannel load balancing with the design attached? i know I need to configure vlan pairs but I'm not sure if it's possible with my current design

    Etherchannel design will work with interface pair as well ,provided the design is appropriate to take care of the asymmetry.
    Coming to your design, if i understand the requirement correctly, you wish to create etherchannel between 3750 stacked switch and the pair of CAT6K. Enabling VSS on the pair of CAT6K switches and then creating etherchannel should help.But the flow symmetry will not be guaranteed ( meaning the same IPS may not see the forward and the reverse packets of the flow).

  • EtherChannel load-balance on Catalyst 6500 running CatOS

    I know EtherChannel load balancing can use either MAC addresses, IP addresses, or the TCP port numbers.
    1 Can I config it to make sure every port under the same Channel group has the same traffic utilization?
    2 If one of the Etherchannel physical port has traffic more than its physical bandwidth, why switch can't use another Etherchannel physical port to share the traffic?

    Normally it will fairly well balance the traffic . There is no way to make sure each channel is exactly the same utilization wise . You can look at how it is load balanced and make a change from say mac to ip address if it looks like you aren't getting the balance you want . It would be very rare that you are going to fill one port on the channel without filling the rest almost the same .Exceptions would be if you most of your traffic is headed to one place like a certain server , even then if you used ip addresses in both directions as the load balance I think it would balance out pretty good. If it got to that point where one link was almost filled you would have to think about adding another port to the channel . This is a real good page http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk213/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094714.shtml

  • Help choose the appropriate etherchannel load balance method

    Hi
    I have 2 network architectures :case A and case B  (found architecture below)
    Case A : one server connected on the switch on each site
    Case B : 3 server connected on the switch behind a router on each site
    2 site are connected by 2 wireless link :each wireless link have 105 Mbps bandwith (I absolutly need the agregate bandwith 210)
    Site headquarter is the principal site and site backup is use to backup data located on the principal site
    I use Gbit cisco  2960 switch
    I use etherchannel to agregate the 2 switch port (port 1 and port 2) where the 2 wireless link are connected
    I configure src-mac for case A but all trafic is send only on one wireless link .
    Please help me to choose the more appropriate load balance method to load balance traffic between the 2 link for the case A and for the case B
    Please advise
    Thanks in advance

    Disclaimer
    The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
    Liability Disclaimer
    In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
    Posting
    Your Case A might be handled by port hashing, but unfortunately most Cisco platforms don't support it.
    Your Case B isn't much better, as you only have 3 hosts on each side, and according to your drawing, they are behind routers, so you don't want to use MAC hashes.  If you don't have port hashing, next best choice might be src-dest-IP hashing.  Again, though, with just 3 hosts, your distribution will likely not be very balanced, especially over shorter time intervals.
    To obtain best utilization of your links, you need some kind of better link bonding, such as MLPPP (unfortunately, usually won't scale to FE rates) or a hardware MUX.  Next best option, if you could route across the links, would be something like Cisco's OER/PfR which can dynamically load balance.

  • IPS-Portchannel-EtherChannel Load Balancing

    I have two 4506 switches and 2 IPS 4260
    I have problem med Interfaces unjoin and join portchannel
    GigabitEthernet3/23 left the port-channel Port-channel1
    GigabitEthernet3/23 joined port-channel Port-channel1
    The IPS interfaces
    UDVIK01_AWG_IPS# sh interfaces brief
    CC   Interface            Sensing State   Link   Inline Mode        Pair Status
    *    Management0/0        Disabled        Up
         GigabitEthernet0/1   Disabled        Down   Unpaired           N/A
         GigabitEthernet2/0   Enabled         Up     Inline-vlan-pair   N/A
         GigabitEthernet2/1   Enabled         Up     Inline-vlan-pair   N/A
         GigabitEthernet2/2   Disabled        Down   Unpaired           N/A
         GigabitEthernet2/3   Disabled        Down   Unpaired           N/A
    I have uploaded Debug file and other file of my configuration
    Best Regard
    Rene Rolsted

    Debug from switch:
    Dec  8 15:11:41.363: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: for agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:11:41.363: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: PAgP not enabled on agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_port_down: Gi3/23 Inform yes
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_invoke_port_down: Gi3/23
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: fec_unbundle: Gi3/23
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_change_vgc: gcchngreq == 0 for Gi3/23
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_change_vgc: Gi3/23 gcchngreq = 0 gc = 0
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: %EC-5-UNBUNDLE: Interface GigabitEthernet3/23 left the port-channel Port-channel1
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_delete_port_from_agport_internal: delete_port_from_agport: for port Gi3/23
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: delete port (Gi3/23) from agport (Po1)
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_delete_port_from_agport_list: afb->nports-- = 1 [Gi3/23]
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: Un-Bndl msg NOT send to PM for port Gi3/23 from Po1
    Dec  8 15:11:41.367: FEC: pagp_switch_reset_load_index: reading load-index for port Po1
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_port_up: Gi3/23
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_invoke_port_up: Gi3/23
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_agc_compatable: comparing GC values of Gi3/23 Gi3/24 flag = 1 1
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_port_attrib_diff: Gi3/23 Gi3/24 same
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_agc_compatable: GC values are compatable
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: fec_bundle: Gi3/23
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: add port (Gi3/23) to agport (Po1)
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_add_port_to_agport_list: afb->nports++ = 2 [Gi3/23]
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: %EC-5-BUNDLE: Interface GigabitEthernet3/23 joined port-channel Port-channel1
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_add_port_to_agport_internal: msg to PM to bundle port Gi3/23 with Po1
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_want_to_bundle: Bndl msg to PM for port Gi3/23 to Agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: for agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:11:45.363: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: PAgP not enabled on agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:11:45.367: FEC: pagp_switch_reset_load_index: reading load-index for port Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:08.370: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: for agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:08.370: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: PAgP not enabled on agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_port_down: Gi3/24 Inform yes
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_invoke_port_down: Gi3/24
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: fec_unbundle: Gi3/24
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_change_vgc: gcchngreq == 0 for Gi3/24
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_change_vgc: Gi3/24 gcchngreq = 0 gc = 0
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: %EC-5-UNBUNDLE: Interface GigabitEthernet3/24 left the port-channel Port-channel1
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_delete_port_from_agport_internal: delete_port_from_agport: for port Gi3/24
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: delete port (Gi3/24) from agport (Po1)
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_delete_port_from_agport_list: afb->nports-- = 1 [Gi3/24]
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: Un-Bndl msg NOT send to PM for port Gi3/24 from Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:08.374: FEC: pagp_switch_reset_load_index: reading load-index for port Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_port_up: Gi3/24
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_invoke_port_up: Gi3/24
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_agc_compatable: comparing GC values of Gi3/24 Gi3/23 flag = 1 1
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_port_attrib_diff: Gi3/24 Gi3/23 same
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_agc_compatable: GC values are compatable
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: fec_bundle: Gi3/24
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: add port (Gi3/24) to agport (Po1)
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_add_port_to_agport_list: afb->nports++ = 2 [Gi3/24]
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: %EC-5-BUNDLE: Interface GigabitEthernet3/24 joined port-channel Port-channel1
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_add_port_to_agport_internal: msg to PM to bundle port Gi3/24 with Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_want_to_bundle: Bndl msg to PM for port Gi3/24 to Agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: for agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:13.362: FEC: pagp_switch_hotstandby: PAgP not enabled on agport Po1
    Dec  8 15:12:13.366: FEC: pagp_switch_reset_load_index: reading load-index for port Po1

  • Unequal Load Balance on Etherchannel (L2/SW3400ME)

    Hi, i have a problem with my L2 port-channel between 2 SW ME-3400-24TS-D (12.2(44)SE5), there is a unequal load balance and i don't know how to fixed. Should I change the load balance method?.
    All four ports have the same config, except one (int fa0/1 on SW_2) that have this commands:
    MAMANIVLN1P1IRA1#SH RUN INT FA0/1 | INC hold
     hold-queue 4096 in
     hold-queue 4096 out
    Should i change this hold-queue config?
    Here more outputs where you can see the diference, one link has 2mb and the other link has 60mb,, that's a big diference, i would like to know how to solve this:
    SW_1#sh int fa0/9 | inc (Desc|rate)
      Description: !!!!!! HACIA SW_2 !!!!!
      Queueing strategy: fifo
      5 minute input rate 2088000 bits/sec, 2065 packets/sec
      5 minute output rate 25000 bits/sec, 46 packets/sec
    SW_1#sh int fa0/10 | inc (Desc|rate)
      Description: PORTCHANNEL10 HACIA SW_2
      Queueing strategy: fifo
      5 minute input rate 1905000 bits/sec, 1948 packets/sec
      5 minute output rate 63348000 bits/sec, 6095 packets/sec
    SW_2#sh int fa0/1 | inc (Desc|rate) 
      Description: Hacia SW_1_Fa0/9
      Queueing strategy: fifo
      30 second input rate 27000 bits/sec, 48 packets/sec
      30 second output rate 2385000 bits/sec, 1996 packets/sec
    SW_2#sh int fa0/2 | inc (Desc|rate)
      Description: PORTCHANNEL10 HACIA SW_1
      Queueing strategy: fifo
      5 minute input rate 63567000 bits/sec, 6114 packets/sec
      5 minute output rate 1935000 bits/sec, 1976 packets/sec
    more outputs...
    SW_1#sh etherchannel load-balance 
    EtherChannel Load-Balancing Configuration:
            src-mac
    EtherChannel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
    Non-IP: Source MAC address
      IPv4: Source MAC address
    SW_2#sh etherchannel load-balance 
    EtherChannel Load-Balancing Configuration:
            src-mac
    EtherChannel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:
    Non-IP: Source MAC address
      IPv4: Source MAC address
    SW_1#SH MAC ADDress-table INTerface po10 | inc Total
    Total Mac Addresses for this criterion: 297
    SW_2#SH MAC ADDress-table INTerface po10 | inc Total
    Total Mac Addresses for this criterion: 66
    In advance thanks for the help.

    Normally it will fairly well balance the traffic . There is no way to make sure each channel is exactly the same utilization wise . You can look at how it is load balanced and make a change from say mac to ip address if it looks like you aren't getting the balance you want . It would be very rare that you are going to fill one port on the channel without filling the rest almost the same .Exceptions would be if you most of your traffic is headed to one place like a certain server , even then if you used ip addresses in both directions as the load balance I think it would balance out pretty good. If it got to that point where one link was almost filled you would have to think about adding another port to the channel . This is a real good page http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk213/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094714.shtml

  • IDSM-2 load balancing on inline mode is it possible ..?

    Hi there .. I am currenty working on a project and need to find out as to whether etherchanelling load balancing can be configured between several IDSM-2 running on inline mode. The IPS 5.1 admin guide states that it is possible for IOS based switches having the IDSM-2 configured on promiscuous mode, however I have heard that it might also be possible to configure etherchannelling load balance when the IDSM-2 are on inline mode. Any help .. commments will be appreciated .. any links to refer to will be even better
    Thanks !!!

    To configure EtherChannel load balancing on IDSM-2, you must install Cisco IOS 12.2(18)SXE and have Supervisor Engine 720. Cisco IOS only supports promiscuous IDSM-2 EtherChanneling using VACL capture (not SPAN or monitor). Refer the URL
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps4077/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008055df92.html#wp1044800

  • LACP Load Balancing Method

    We have two stack of 3750-X switchs interconnected through LACP, and a CheckPoint Firewall connected to one of the stack. The Firewall use a LACP bond to connect to the 3750-X Stack. On the Cisco switches we don't use any Layer3 functionality.
    Since the switch are used in Layer2 mode, can we define the a load balancing method that use IP informations ?
    For example Can we change the load balancing method from src-mac to src-dst-ip ?
    BRgds

      Hi,
    yes you can choose the method of Load balancing in LACP:
    port-channel load-balance {dst-ip | dst-mac | src-dst-ip | src-dst-mac | src-ip | src-mac}
    Configure an EtherChannel load-balancing method.
    The default is src-mac.
    Select one of these load-distribution methods:
    •dst-ip—Load distribution is based on the destination-host IP address.
    •dst-mac—Load distribution is based on the destination-host MAC address of the incoming packet.
    •src-dst-ip—Load distribution is based on the source-and-destination host-IP address.
    •src-dst-mac—Load distribution is based on the source-and-destination host-MAC address.
    •src-ip—Load distribution is based on the source-host IP address.
    •src-mac—Load distribution is based on the source-MAC address of the incoming packet.

  • LOAD BALANCE BEHAVIOR FOR 7600 ON ETHERCHANNELS

    Hi Everyone,
    Currently I'm planning to implement ether-channels on 7600 routers, but there's something that's still not clear to me, regarding the load balancing behavior, for L2VPN and L3VPN.
    I've read that 7600 in MPLS default load balance behavior is to take  the SIP and DIP if present and the bottom of the stack label or the 5th label depending upon the number of labels on the stack. In l2VPN scenarios when ether-channel is used, if no IP traffic is present what is the default behavior of the etherchannel to calculate the load balancing hash function to select a given link on the bundle.
    I'll appreciate any feedback regarding this.

    Hi Louis, you could set default routes on the ASA's with tracking, and use ospf downstream to inject the default route in to the network with default information originate - this will only advertise out a default route if it has it in the routing table. With SLA you can track internet reachability by IP SLA echo to something like 8.8.8.8. Both sides can advertise this in to the network, if one goes then there is one left. Just be mindful of the policies and NAT required, you will have to duplicate the rules on the ASA's. With the NAT you have to ensure, that outgoing traffic comes back in the same path it left so it doesn't break connections.

  • 2 ISP load balancing and redundancy

    Hello!!
    Our small company has about 40 branches spreaded within city. Branches are connected by optic wire supplied by our ISP. So in ISP our branches are located in one VLAN. From every branch we created VPN tunnel to our server room in central office. Central office is like a cetner point. If optic wire fails to central office, there would no VPN tunnels and no network to all branches. Moreover, all the traffice goes through central office.
    Now we decided to pave one more optic line to our central office. And that will increase bandwidth and redundancy.
    Private network topology: There are no default gateways and ip-addresses. For examle, at first branch I will plug computer directly into media converter and at the second branch plug another computer to the media converter. After that this two computers became in one network. And can assign any ip addresses to them.
    What I have: our firewall do enough work, don't want to overload it. But we have some free ports in our new cisco 3750. The question is how to do load balancing and redundanccy? Can it do load balancing according to traffic? And how load balance incoming traffic? For example, connection was established from branche's router, how this router will choose through which line make connection? By the way, at all branches we use noisy cisco
    3700 series routers.

    Sorry for upping 1 year old threat.
    We talked to our Network Provider. They said "these two cables are coming from two different places, so there is no way to use etherchannel. You must use active-standby solution."
    Relying on STP we just put two cables into 3750 stack. But with default STP settings, connection was very unstable, many packet losses and disconnections. So we found easy solution with "flex links", making one interface backup of the other. And only now I recognized that this is not a failover solution. Because, if network beyond media converter will down, link from media converter to switch would still up.
    What could I do to make our L2 WAN redundant? Are there any additional STP settings.

  • LACP/Load Balancing Question

    This past weekend we replaced our Catalyst 4506 switches with a combination of Catalyst 4500-X switches (provides fiber and 10 GB connections to our closet switches and our UCS) and 2960-X switches (all other servers and printers are connected here). Our backup server has two NICs teamed into a NIC Team (port 35 and 36 on the 2960-X switch). The NIC team was set to the following:
    Team Type Selection: 802.3ad Dynamic with Fault Tolerance
    Transmit Load Balancing: Dest IP Address
    Since we switched to the new switches we are seeing a high number of discards from our backup server on one of the ports in the NIC team. I verified the port-channel configuration on the switches and set the "port-channel load-balance" to src-dst-ip. When running the test etherchannel command from one of my servers to the backup server it responds that it would choose port 36. When I run a backup from this same source server to my backup server it chooses port 35 for everything. I would expect this if the data is coming from the same source ip to the backup server. To confirm this I added another test job from a different source IP. It still only chooses port 35.
    If I "show lacp 3 counters" here's what I see:
                 LACPDUs         Marker      Marker Response    LACPDUs
    Port       Sent   Recv     Sent   Recv     Sent   Recv      Pkts Err
    Channel group: 3
    Gi2/0/35    14616  12368    0      0        0      0         0
    Gi2/0/36    14628  12368    0      0        0      0         0
    From this it appears the switch is pretty evenly distributing data across both channels. Am I correct? If that is true then is it a fair assumption that something on the backup server is rejecting the data on port 36 and thus causing the discards?
    Just need an opinion on what might be going on to help convince people as to where the problem lies.
    Thanks.

    Disclaimer
    The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
    Liability Disclaimer
    In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
    Posting
    4500-X says:
    Port Buffers
    32-MB Shared Memory
    2960X says:
    Feature
    2960-XR
    2960-X
    2960-S
    2960
    Egress buffers
    4 MB
    4 MB
    2 MB
    2 MB

  • How to load balance two link (resilient link)

    How to load balance (if can) or failover two Fiber channel like as below?
    interface GigabitEthernet0/1
    switchport mode trunk
    channel-group 1 mode active
    channel-protocol lacp
    interface GigabitEthernet0/2
    switchport mode trunk
    channel-group 1 mode active
    channel-protocol lacp

    Hi
    You can use this "port-channel load-balance src-dst-ip", this will do a XOR on source & destination IP addresses and choose the interface G0/1 if the first bit of the result is 0 or the interface G0/2 if the first bit of the result is 1.
    But you can check the path used with that command: "sh etherchannel 1 port-channel"
    You can load balance with the mac-addresses too (it is the default mode I think)
    http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/473/4.html
    Rate if it helps.
    MB

Maybe you are looking for