Link Aggregation with LACP off

Hi,
How does Link Aggregation in Solaris 10 works in the switch if LACP is off?
If it's flip-flopping between two ports in the switch. Who's responsible to update the arp table in the switch?
Thanks

I haven't tried it with a Cisco but you don't have any other/old network/interface settings left on the OS X server when trying LACP do you?
There should only be the bond0 "interface" (with IP, netmask and so on) when trying LACP.

Similar Messages

Link Aggregation with LRT214/224

Is it possible to use link aggregation (LAG) with 2 or more ports on the LRT214/224? I'm trying to prepare for Comcast's 2 Gbps ethernet service and wanted to create a LAG with my 224. Thanks!

Hi @ericnix, I believe you don't have that option on the Linksys LRT214/LRT224. It is only capable of providing upto 1000 MBPS LAN speed.

Link Aggregation with QSFP links on 5672UP

Hi Everyone,
I have a question on my mind for quite some time regarding QSFP aggregation on Nexus 5672UP switch hoping gurus here could shield some light.
According to the data sheet, 5672UP supports 6 true QSFP. I am in a situation where a server require 2xQSFP(40Gbps) links to be bundled together. I wonder with QSFP, can I treat it as normal SFP+ interfaces and aggregate two QSFP links together using vPC to get 80Gbps? If it is possible, it absolutely offers better bandwidth and redundancy.
Thanks,

Hi,
Yes, you can aggregate the 2 QSFPs together in a Portchannel. Just remember if the server has 10Gig SFP+ interfaces, you need a special cable with one side with multiple SFP+ interfaces (4) and the other side 40Gig with MTP interface.
If the server has 40Gig interface than you can go straight from the switch to the server.
HTH

Fedora and SRW2024 link aggregation

Usually I am reluctant to criticize products, but this time I decided to get it out of my chest.
For people considering purchase of Linksys SRW2024 I would rather suggest to think twice before making this step.
Let’s cut to the chase... Recently I have built iSCSI storage with 2x 1Gbit NIC (Inter 1000PT) for my ESX server and the only missing ingredient was a dissent gigabit switch. Eventually I got SRW2024 as according to Linksys specs it supports VLANs and Link Aggregation etc. After configuring Fedora distro for link bonding I was unable to ping any of the hosts on the network (172.16.192.0/24). I checked the status of individual NICs and a configuration on the switch million of times, but I couldn’t find anything that was out of ordinary. In order to eliminate issues with NIC bonding on Fedora system I used my old DES3226 Layer 2 switch... and guess what? It worked just fine.
Next obvious step was to upgrade firmware from 1.2.1 to 1.2.2 (hardware version 1.2), but yet again... NO LUCK.
My question to Linksys Support or anyone who come across the same issue is – Are you aware of the issue and if so please did you find the solution as I have found number of users having similar problems!

Hi, the topic is quite old, but I am facing the same problem. We have three SRW2024 Switches. The LACP between the Switches is working, but I want to use the 802.3ad (EtherNet Link Aggregation) with two Xserves, but can´t get it working. The Linksys-Support is unable to help, because they ignore Apple-Products and name it an Apple-problem. Witch Firmware do You use on Your SRW2024? Many thanks in advance Regards svenc
Message Edited by svenc on 03-14-2008 01:16 AM

Assistance needed with SG300-10 and QNAP TS-459 Pro II Link Aggregation

All,
As the subject specifies, I have a pair of devices on a local network that I would like to play nicely together.
My problem:
If the TS-459 is configured for standalone (No Link Aggregation), then I can access the NAS via Ping, web interface, NFS, etc.. however, If I try enabling Link Aggregation, then I lose TCP/IP connectivity to it and must use QNAP's Finder utility to change Link Aggregation mode back to Standalone.
What I'm asking is - has anyone here configured a QNAP NAS appliance with Link Aggregation enabled with an SG300 or similar?? If so, could you kindly provide a walk-through on the appropriate settings for each?
My first attempts on the NAS side were to choose the "Balance-alb" (automatic load balance) and "Balance-tlb" (adaptive transmit load balance) - The QNAP_Turbo_NAS_User_manual_V3.4_ENG.pdf states that these two modes are for "General Switches", so I assumed they should work.. unfortunately, no luck for me..
Next up, I tried the IEEE 802.3ad / Link Aggregation setting on the NAS, while the device was rebooting, I configured the two GB ports on the SG300 to be a LAG with LACP enabled. Unfortunately, this too did not work as I had hoped.
I called QNAP support and of course they don't have an Sg300-10 to test with, but will test their TS-459 Pro II to confirm the Link Aggregation settings function as advertised. I hope to hear back from them later this evening. In the meantime, if anyone here has insight, it would be very much appreciated. The NAS and SG300 are for a home lab consisting of a pair of Dual-six core systems with 48GB of mem each for vSphere.
NAS Details:
Model: QNAP TS-459 Pro II
Firmware: 3.4.4 (0718T)
Drives: Seagate 2TB x4
Switch Details:
Model: Cisco SG300-10
Firmware version active image: 1.1.0.73
Thank you,
Burke

Hi Burke,
You can use link-aggregation 802.3AD with the sg-300. Try to make the trunk in the sg-300 with LACP enabled (before you make the trunk, otherwise LACP is disabled and you will only be able to do so by deleting the trunk and add it again). Flow control is enabled in the sg-300 (altough i'm not sure if this is needed). I've got the sg-300 and the QNAP TS 439 pro II+.

Link Aggregation dladm on T2000 with 2 e1000g. How can i change mtu size

Hello
I made a Link Aggregation on a T2000 with e1000g1 & e1000g2 successfully.
Now i want to raise up the mtu size to mtu 9000 for the aggregation.
I tried /etc/hostname.aggr
mtu 9000
unsuccessfully- MTU size still 1500
/kernel/drv/etc/e1000g.conf
setting Max Fram Size for 1 2 3 interface to 2(upto 8k)
also not successfully
MaxFrameSize=0,2,2,2;
# 0 is for normal ethernet frames.
# 1 is for upto 4k size frames.
# 2 is for upto 8k size frames.
# 3 is for upto 16k size frames.
# These are maximum frame limits, not the actual ethernet frame
# size. Your actual ethernet frame size would be determined by
# protocol stack configuration (please refer to ndd command man pages)
# For Jumbo Frame Support (9k ethernet packet)
# use 3 (upto 16k size frames)
Has someone an idea?
thanx for advice

Bug is described:
http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-1-6326664-1
Solution is
T-Patch 125020-01
Message was edited by:
sunibk

Using Link Aggregation and VLAN tagging with LDOMs

Hi,
Anyone know if Link aggregation combined with VLAN tagging works for LDOMs?
Any links or references would be appreciated.....
It would be very handy if each LDOM could have multiple interfaces on different VLANs....
Regards,
Daniel

I agree with bzptlx. While you can have vswitch plumbed without net-dev, and then route traffic inside the control domain, so that you can utilize aggregation, it adds complexity, and in some environments it's just impossible.
I would say that this is number 1 deficiency with LDOM's in general.

SRW224G4 and 2960 Link Aggregation LACP problem

Hello
WE have Linksys SRW224G4 and Cisco 2960 switches.
We made link aggregation onboth two ports between them, all is working except that when I make continuous ping between them it fails every 90 seconds one ping. I saw the problem is , when I connect to SRW224G4 by telnet and go CTRL+Z and lcli , and login, I got console. Every 90 seconds I got this messages:
01-Jan-2000 22:14:49 %TRUNK-W-PORTREMOVED: Port g2 removed from ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %TRUNK-W-PORTREMOVED: Port g1 removed from ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %LINK-W-Down: ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %TRUNK-I-PORTADDED: Port g1 added to ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %LINK-I-Up: ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:56 %TRUNK-I-PORTADDED: Port g2 added to ch1
So after this one ping fails, and it goes good next 90 seconds, and then again same group of same messages and one ping fails.
I tried all options to change on Linksys and nothing, still i got this link down and up and one ping failed.
Did someone had same problem, can you help me somehow.
THank you
Hrvoje Pastar

Hello
WE have Linksys SRW224G4 and Cisco 2960 switches.
We made link aggregation onboth two ports between them, all is working except that when I make continuous ping between them it fails every 90 seconds one ping. I saw the problem is , when I connect to SRW224G4 by telnet and go CTRL+Z and lcli , and login, I got console. Every 90 seconds I got this messages:
01-Jan-2000 22:14:49 %TRUNK-W-PORTREMOVED: Port g2 removed from ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %TRUNK-W-PORTREMOVED: Port g1 removed from ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %LINK-W-Down: ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %TRUNK-I-PORTADDED: Port g1 added to ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:53 %LINK-I-Up: ch1
01-Jan-2000 22:14:56 %TRUNK-I-PORTADDED: Port g2 added to ch1
So after this one ping fails, and it goes good next 90 seconds, and then again same group of same messages and one ping fails.
I tried all options to change on Linksys and nothing, still i got this link down and up and one ping failed.
Did someone had same problem, can you help me somehow.
THank you
Hrvoje Pastar

Mac Mini Server Link aggregation - Thunderbolt or USB 3 gigabit ethernet adaptors

I am setting up a late 2012 Mac Mini as a file server with Server 2.2. It has a Promise Pegasus R4 RAID and LaCie 4TB drives daisy chained via the Thunderbolt connection. 4 users on MacPro's will connect to the server to access these hard drives via gigabit ethernet.
I imagine the gigabit ethernet will be the bottleneck, so I'm now looking at link aggregation. Not a problem on the MacPro's but the Mac Mini will require an adaptor to get a second gigabit port. From reading this forum I understand the Apple Thunderbolt to Gigabit adaptor will work, but I'm concerned that it will need to be fitted 3rd in line after the R4 and LaCie drives. The 10Gbps bandwidth Thunderbolt has, may cause another bottleneck with all three working off the same port?
An option would be to use one of the USB 3 ports with this adaptor http://www.ebuyer.com/412005-startec...edium=products
I believe it work with OSX, but I have no speed information or if OSX link aggregation will work using it.
Any thoughts on the above would be appreciated and recommendations on a suitable Network Switch with LACP support welcome.

At present Mountain Lion Server cannot use a LACP bond, in my experience only of course. http://www.small-tree.com/kb_results.asp?ID=59 describes LACP/Bonds do not show up in Server Admin GUI on Mountain Lion
anyone know how to do it? or the location and the name of the plist file to configure the network interface in ML server?
regards

Link Aggregation, revisited again

I did all this research to find out how LACP Link Aggregation actually functions in OS X Server, and found many varying opinions out there (there is precious little in OS X documentation, it says essentially set it up and you are good to go:). It seems there is a disagreement on whether OS X (properly configured with LACP switch) will actually spread out traffic dynamically, or whether it only spreads out traffic when one becomes saturated.
So I did a test, configured en0 and en1 as a link aggregate called Fat Pipe, and both show green (Cisco switch with LACP for those ports). However, no matter how many concurrent read/writes to different servers, I can't confirm that there is any improvement at all, which leads me to believe that 'true' load balancing is not happening.
Also, I have read 2 differing opinions on how the bonded NICs should appear in Network prefs: configured as "Off", or as DHCP with self-assigned 169.x.x.x address.
Anyone with info, would be much appreciated. At this point I'm almost inclined to just give each NIC their own IP, and just manually assign some users to connect with one IP, and some with the other...doesn't seem as efficient as aggregation though.
Thanks

I did all this research to find out how LACP Link Aggregation actually functions in OS X Server, and found many varying opinions out there
There's no disagreement as far as I'm aware
It's a function of link aggregation (which is an IEEE standard) and therefore not subject to the whims of Apple's implementation.
The low-down is that the links are both used and specifically which link is used is based on the MAC address of the source and destination hosts.
Moreover, there is no concept of link saturation or failover when one is full - it's entirely possible for one to to be saturated and all the other links to be completely idle if that's the way the MAC addresses run.
A simplified view of the algorithm makes it easy to understand - for a 2-link trunk using en0 and en1, the system looks at the MAC addresses of the source and destination hosts. If they're both odd it uses en0, if they're both even, it uses en0, if they're different (one is odd and one is even) then it uses en1. Therefore, it's entirely possible that all traffic will use one link if all the MAC addresses are odd (or even).
The upshot is that you will never exceed the single link speed (e.g. 1gbps if using 1gbps links) to any single host on the network, so the transfer rates between two devices will be capped at that. However, if a second host initiates a connection, and if that second host's MAC address causes its traffic to transmit over the other link, the the second host's transfers won't be impacted by the first host's transfer.
I can't confirm that there is any improvement at all, which leads me to believe that 'true' load balancing is not happening.
In the real world, it's unlikely that you'll get a single host pumping 1gbps of traffic into the network, so you only really see the effect when you have multiple hosts all talking at the same time. A reasonable test would be to time simultaneous transfers to/from the server, then pull one of the links and see if things slow down.
Also, I have read 2 differing opinions on how the bonded NICs should appear in Network prefs: configured as "Off", or as DHCP with self-assigned 169.x.x.x address.
The links don't appear at all in any of my servers running with trunks. The only interface I see is the trunk.
If I use ifconfig in the terminal I see the underlying links as 'active', but they don't have any IP address assigned to them.

Etherchannel and link aggregation

Hi!
I'm a bit confused now, Sun Trunking supports Cisco Etherchannel, but link aggregation doesn't (if I understand correctly, a with the results of my quick tests).
Sun Trunking seems to be supporting a certain set of drivers and link aggregation another set.
Right now I've got a T2000 with 4 X e1000g and 4 X nxge, does anyone knows, if I can use these interfaces with Cisco Etherchannel, or do I absolutely need to use LACP with link aggregation??? The problem is that the network guys don't want us to use LACP (for whatever reason they have)...
Thank you very much.
Martin

I don't know any cisco term referring to "pure" etherchannel, so I don't know how to answer that. Both LACP and PAgP are link management protocols that cisco can use. I'm supposing that you're asking if the cards will work with PAgP management, but I'm not sure.
This FAQ:
http://www.sun.com/products/networking/ethernet/suntrunking/faq.xml
suggests that I've been incorrect about 802.3ad being a "new" thing and that SunTrunking 1.3 also uses it.
The SunTrunking 1.3 docs here:
http://docs.sun.com/source/817-3374-11/index.html
in chapter 1 (Overview) list six cards. I don't think yours are any of them, so SunTrunking is out.
Because LACP "only" manages the link configuration rather than driving the data, it seems to me that both the link-aggregation and cisco sides could work without LACP being present, but the management of the links might be wonky.
So without LACP, the links have to be configured manually, but I don't yet see anything that states that the two sides will not communicate if that is done.
Further, the 'dladm' man page says that one valid lacp mode on the Solaris is "off", so it must have some functionality without LACP. I would imagine that will required some sort of manual link configuration on the cisco side. (The solaris side is not going to do PAgP).
See also:
http://www.kabewm.com/2007/02/22/solaris-10-lacp-trunking-w-cisco-6509/
When the www.opensolaris.org boards come back up, I would recommend posting this question in the "networking" discussion group.
Darren

How can I set a right link Aggregations?

I have a Enterprise T5220 server, running Solaris 10 that I am using as a backup server. On this server, I have a Layer 4, LACP-enabled link aggregation set up using two of the server's Gigabit NICs (e1000g2 and e1000g3) and until recently I was getting up to and sometimes over 1.5 Gb/s as desired. However, something has happened recently to where I can now barely get over 1 Gb/s. As far as I know, no patches were applied to the server and no changes were made to the switch that it's connected to (Nortel Passport 8600 Series) and the total amount of backup data sent to the server has stayed fairly constant. I have tried setting up the aggregation multiple times and in multiple ways to no avail. (LACP enabled/disabled, different policies, etc.) I've also tried using different ports on the server and switch to rule out any faulty port problems. Our networking guys assure me that the aggregation is set up correctly on the switch side but I can get more details if needed.
In order to attempt to better troubleshoot the problem, I run one of several network speed tools (nttcp, nepim, & iperf) as the "server" on the T5220, and I set up a spare X2100 as a "client". Both the server and client are connected to the same switch. The first set of tests with all three tools yields roughly 600 Mb/s. This seems a bit low to me, I seem to remember getting 700+ Mb/s prior to this "issue". When I run a second set of tests from two separate "client" X2100 servers, coming in on two different Gig ports on the T5220, each port also does ~600 Mb/s. I have also tried using crossover cables and I only get maybe a 50-75 Mb/s increase. After Googling Solaris network optimizations, I found that if I double tcp_max_buf to 2097152, and set tcp_xmit_hiwat & tcp_recv_hiwat to 524288, it bumps up the speed of a single Gig port to ~920 Mb/s. That's more like it!
Unfortunately however, even with the TCP tweaks enabled, I still only get a little over 1 Gb/s through the two aggregated Gig ports. It seems as though the aggregation is only using one port, though MRTG graphs of the two switch ports do in fact show that they are both being utilized equally, essentially splitting the 1 Gb/s speed between
the two ports.
Problem with the server? switch? Aggregation software? All the above? At any rate, I seem to be missing something.. Any help regarding this issue would be greatly appreciated!
Regards,
sundy
Output of several commands on the T5220:
uname -a:
SunOS oitbus1 5.10 Generic_137111-07 sun4v sparc SUNW,SPARC-Enterprise-T5220
ifconfig -a (IP and broadcast hidden for security):
lo0: flags=2001000849 mtu 8232 index 1
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000
aggr1: flags=1000843 mtu 1500 index 2
inet x.x.x.x netmask ffffff00 broadcast x.x.x.x
ether 0:14:4f:ec:bc:1e
dladm show-dev:
e1000g0 link: unknown speed: 0 Mbps duplex: half
e1000g1 link: unknown speed: 0 Mbps duplex: half
e1000g2 link: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full
e1000g3 link: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full
dladm show-link:
e1000g0 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g0
e1000g1 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g1
e1000g2 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g2
e1000g3 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g3
aggr1 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 aggregation: key 1
dladm show-aggr:
key: 1 (0x0001) policy: L4 address: 0:14:4f:ec:bc:1e (auto) device address speed
duplex link state
e1000g2 0:14:4f:ec:bc:1e 1000 Mbps full up attached
e1000g3 1000 Mbps full up attached
dladm show-aggr -L:
key: 1 (0x0001) policy: L4 address: 0:14:4f:ec:bc:1e (auto) LACP mode: active LACP timer: short
device activity timeout aggregatable sync coll dist defaulted expired
e1000g2 active short yes yes yes yes no no
e1000g3 active short yes yes yes yes no no
dladm show-aggr -s:
key: 1 ipackets rbytes opackets obytes %ipkts %opkts
Total 464982722061215050501612388529872161440848661
e1000g2 30677028844072327428231142100939796617960694 66.0 59.5
e1000g3 15821243372049177622000967520476 64822888149 34.0 40.5

sundy.liu wrote:
Unfortunately however, even with the TCP tweaks enabled, I still only get a little over 1 Gb/s through the two aggregated Gig ports. It seems as though the aggregation is only using one port, though MRTG graphs of the two switch ports do in fact show that they are both being utilized equally, essentially splitting the 1 Gb/s speed between
the two ports.
Problem with the server? switch? Aggregation software? All the above? At any rate, I seem to be missing something.. Any help regarding this issue would be greatly appreciated!If you're only running a single stream, that's all you'll see. Teaming/aggregating doesn't make one stream go faster.
If you ran two streams simultaneously, then you should see a difference between a single 1G interface and an aggregate of two 1G interfaces.
Darren

Cant get link aggregation working on srw2048

Hello
We are trying to setup link aggregation between 2 nodes in our cluster. They are 64 bit nodes running Opensuse 11.1 and are connected by Gigabit Ethernet. We have an srw2048 switch.
The problem is we are not able to see any performance improvement in network bandwidth after the configuration. We seem to have configured the nodes correctly: ifconfig shows something like this on both nodes, where eth4, eth5 are slaves to bond0 :
bond0     Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1E:68:78:F9:84            inet addr:192.168.1.198 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0           inet6 addr: fe80::21e:68ff:fe78:f984/64 Scope:Link           UP BROADCAST RUNNING MASTER MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1           RX packets:40443248 errors:442 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:442           TX packets:30955485 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0           collisions:0 txqueuelen:0            RX bytes:31836352423 (30361.5 Mb) TX bytes:31997996320 (30515.6 Mb)
eth4      Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1E:68:78:F9:84            UP BROADCAST RUNNING SLAVE MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1           RX packets:6213 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0           TX packets:15477741 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0           collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000            RX bytes:1290977 (1.2 Mb) TX bytes:16000747443 (15259.5 Mb)           Interrupt:246 Base address:0xe000   eth5      Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1E:68:78:F9:84            UP BROADCAST RUNNING SLAVE MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1           RX packets:40437035 errors:442 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:442           TX packets:15477744 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0           collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000            RX bytes:31835061446 (30360.2 Mb) TX bytes:15997248877 (15256.1 Mb)           Interrupt:247 Base address:0x4000
Starting the network services shows
bond0          bond0     enslaved interface: eth5     bond0     enslaved interface: eth4     bond0     (DHCP) . . IP/Netmask: '192.168.1.198' / '255.255.255.0'
So it seems that the client side configuration is correct. The bond has been configured with the default mode balance-rr.
On the switch side, we have grouped the right ports to form LAG groups and have checked LACP on them. Running some trusted TCP benchmarks yields the same results as the original configuration without link aggregation.
I feel we are missing some configuration on the switch side.
Can anybody point out what we are doing wrong?
Thanks,
K**bleep**ij

If you think this has been a mis-configuration on the switch side, please try to reset the switch and then re-configure it again. You may also seek assistance with a Cisco/Linksys tech support so that they can guide you step by step at real time.

Best Switch to use for Link Aggregation

Looking to buy a new switch and was hoping that someone is already doing link aggregation on a current switch. Looking for 48 ports, I have a lot of Xserves.
What model have you had the best luck with? THX

Switches are like so many other things in life - you get what you pay for.
Sometimes you can pay less and get enough (i.e. it works well enough)
Sometimes you can pay less and not know what you're missing (you don't know what some of those advanced features are anyway, even though they could be useful)
Sometimes you pay more and get features you don't need/want/understand
Sometimes you find just the right option.
Start off by determining the importance to your business. If the switch blows out and all your servers go dark, how much will that cost you if it takes an hour to get it back up? 4 hours? a minute?
Look also at how much traffic you're pushing through your network. If you just need ports but aren't pushing many packets then a cheaper switch may suffice, but if you need every port to run at full line rate with no packet drops then you need something bigger.
Do you need the switch to just pass traffic, or do you want statistics (e.g. SNMP, RMON, etc.) so you can track which ports are busiest?
Then, of course, there's a budget. It could be $100. It could be $10,000. Your options are limited at $100, but $10K will cover a lot of options.
While you're doing this, consider expansion room. Are you likely to need more ports soon? Are 48 ports enough? Maybe a chassis-based switch that's expandable would be a better option.
At the high end you might consider anything from Cisco. Their Catalyst range of switches are the workhorses of many networks. They also come with a matching price tag.
Other options worth considering at the higher end would be Force 10's. Force 10 is known for their 10-gigabit network equipment, but their S Series switches are a powerful play.
Then there's Juniper's EX range. Juniper are known more for their routing platform (I guarantee most of your internet traffic goes through a Juniper router at some point), but their switches are a natural progression.
Coming down the line a little, look at Brocade's FastIron switches. Formerly Foundry Networks (before they got bought out), I" ve used (and continue to use) their switches in my network. If all those are above your price bracket then HP ProCurve switches are worth a look.
All of the above still may do more than you need, though. If all you really, really want is link aggregation and don't care about the rest then I'd probably go for a NetGear over the other lower-end players such as D-Link or LinkSys (even though LinkSys is now owned by Cisco).

SG300-10mp Fibre Link aggregation

Hi,
I have 2 SG300-10mp switches which i am trying to create a link redundancy for over the two fibre ports.
On the web interface when i go into the LAG settings ports g9 and g10 which are the fibre ones don't show up.
How do i create the link aggregation between them? Or perhaps i'm doing the wrong thing... All i require is the two switches to function as normal, however should one fibre port become faulty or the cable to break, the over port just takes over straight away with no latency, or atleast very minimal.
Please help!

Hello Ashley,
I think I see where the confusion is here.
When you are looking at the LAG settings page, the 8 things you see listed represent the 8 possible LAGs that the switch can handle, the page actually looks exactly the same even with a 24 port switch. You are seeing the LAGs themselves, not your individual switchports.
If you go to LAG management, you should be able to select one of those 8 LAGs and click the edit button. The window that pops up should allow you to add both fiber ports to the LAG. I don't have one of these in front of me right now, but since the SFP slots on the 300's are combo ports they will probably be numbered as whatever the ethernet port combo'ed to the SFP slot is.
Simply add the ports you would like to the LAG, and check LACP if you are using it on the other switch (you cannot change this setting later, you would have to delete the LAG first).
This way you have the redundancy you are looking over with the added benefit of having more throughput available between those two switches, since the traffic will be load-balanced across the LAG.
A LAG will also failover much faster than two redundant links, since it won't have to go through the Spanning Tree process everytime a link state changes.
Like I said I don't have one of these in front of me right now, so if I messed something up let me know and I will try it in the lab tomorrow.
Let me know if you need any more information,
Christopher Ebert
Senior Network Support Engineer - Cisco Small Business Support Center
*Please rate helpful posts*

Link Aggregation with LACP off

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for