I have 3750 core/distribution switches with routing enabled in two offices connected with copper link and L3 port channel interfaces. NewOffice#2 has moved about 5 miles farther away from office#1 and I have to deploy new core/distribution switch connect it to old core#2 via F.O and move all access switches with it. Old core will stay in old #2 offices as a bridge between office#1 and new office#2 Office#1core<->copper (Ethernet) <->oldoffice#2core<->f.o. <->new office#2core How I should configure port channels ports on oldoffice#2 core to act as bridge between office#1 core/dist and newoffice#2 core/dist without changing anything else (ip, etc) on whole network
I am building a new network and intended on using the min-link feature on my port-channels between a 3750-X series switch and Nexus 4k.
However reading further into this it seems this feature is only supported on higher end models. I cannot find any reference to the min-links feature in the 3750-X configuration guide. Is this an available feature?
The 3750-X model is WS-C3750X-24T-L running IOS 12.2(55)SE3 IP Services
My thoughts is that the is only an LACP supported feature so I may not see the command until I have entered an LACP specific command on the port-channel but unfortunately I do not have a 3750X to verify this on at present.
We have a switch that, when configuring auto qos on and edge port facing video equipment, the upstream port channel drops. I was wondering if no auto qos would have to be configured on the member ports of the port channel prior to enabling auto qos on any other ports.
Should I keep the configuration on the physical ports and not configure the Port-Channel Interfaces? Do I need to configure port-channel load balancing? Is the channel-group mode sufficient? Goal is to basically create 2 links to the 2960 to double the bandwidth and provide redundancy.
I have a pair of 6500's setup with VSS and there is currently only one link between then. However one end of the link is on Po10 and the other end is on Po25. If I move the Po25 over to Po10, will things break? It seems to be working fine now. I'm about to add a second link and I'm concerned about the current configuration. It makes more sense to me to have both ends of the same link on the same port-channel ID. I've seen documentation which states otherwise however.
interface Port-channel10 no switchport no ip address
I'm trying to setup a port on a catalyst 3750 so it will pass traffic for 2 vlans. It connects to a (watchguard) firewall which I've configured with a primary IP (for vlan 27) and a secondary IP (for vlan 29).
However I can't seem to find the correct commands to enter on the cisco switch port (I've tried a variety).
FYI the current configuration is... interface FastEthernet1/0/38 description ## Connection to WG vlan27 and vlan 29 ## switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
We have a stack of switches that is at the max number of members allowed in the stack. Problem is we are running out of port density and need to add more ports. So instead of adding a whole new stack I would rather replace 2 of the 24-port swicthes with 48-port switches.
If the two 24-port swicthes we are removing are stack members and neither of them are the stack master, I should be able to replace the 24-port switches with the 48-port switches without bringing the master offline? If the new 48-port switches are running the same IOS version as the current 24-port swicthes, they should add themselves to the stack?Would I have to tell the new 48-port swicthes what switch numbers they are replacing in order for them to be added to the stack since we are at the max number of members?Also since the 48-port swicthes are replacing 24-port switches will the master give the 48-port switches the configuration for only the 24-ports?
We need to change the Channel-group settings in 3750 switch from Mode ON to Mode Active. We have tried once by removing the physical interfaces from the port-channel group but we lost the connectivity to the secondary switch. Any step by step procedure without losing the connectivity between switches.
i want to realize a 20gb ring stp with 6 3750x stacked by 2. I want to install 2 3750x stacked configured in hsrp mode with other 2 3750 stacked. These 2 different stack are interconnected by a cross-stack ether channel 20Gb fiber. On the other side of the room i want to create a new stack with 2 3750x with cross-stack ether channel 20gb connected with the previous 2 stacks. So, in total 3 different cross-stack ether channel 20Gb stacks interconnected creating a ring stp of 20 Gb.
I have 2 Cisco 6509 switches linked together via single Fibre as a trunk.I want to change this to a port channel where I will add another 3 fibre ports to the port channel but what order do I do this to minimise any disruption.
1-Configure PortChannel and add the 3 new ports, this will bring up the Port Channel but what effect will this have on traffic currently going over the single Trunk link? Will spanning tree go mad, how will switches react?
2-Convert existing Trunk link to Portchannel then add in new ports to PortChannel, I guess in doing this there will be a small hit on traffic as it changes to a port channel.
We have 2 6513's that are linked via 2 10 gig interfaces, using an LACP channel.I received an alert this aft stating that the far 6513 was unreachable and the port channel int PO3 had gone down, the 2 10 gig interfaces had also gone down on either side. 5 mins later PO3 had resestablished itself and has been fine since. [code]
We are running nexus 5018 in our DC.What is the difference betwen "channel-group 214 mode active" and " channel-group 216" Any difference?.. because i have problem with this config we are going build a server config?
We have problem with porth channel down.
5K# sh int po71 port-channel71 is down (No operational members) vPC Status: Down, vPC number: 71 [packets forwarded via vPC peer-link]
What is the load balance method of 3750 port channel ( by source ip , or by source mac ) to diver traffic to paths? I have tried to use 10.242.104.101 and 10.242.104.102 as source ip, it will travel to the same link (G0/1) within one port channel (G0/1+G0/2). Howerver, if I later use 10.242.104.109, then this time it will traffic to G0/2 link. What's the concept behind.
We have one 3825 router used as voice gateway. For redudancy, we want to connect it to two different switches which has STP and HSRP running. Can I create a port-channel with two Giga interfaces in 3825 and connect to two different switches? Should I configure port channel in switch with only one port in each port-channel? I know server can be connected to different switches with NIC teaming. I just want to mimic that kind of setup. I did one time for port-channel in 3825, but it was connected to a stacked 3750X. So it's different case now.
I am trying to configure port-channel from one switch to two switchs, and only one interface of each switches make part of the port channel.Cisco IOS Software, ME380x Software (ME380x-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 12.2(52)EY4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) [code]
I am using 3560.IP rouitng is being turned off on this.Curious to know if I will create etherchannel or port channel.I think etherchannel.Correct me if I am wrong.On connecting switches I have vlan10,20,30 to be allowed.I am sure I need to allow these all vlan in 10,20,30 which are on the trunk port on each side switch.Post that will add channel-port lacp and make it in active mode.Is that correct.This way traffic will be load-balanced/aggregated on minimum 2 ports who are the part of this.
Here's what I'm trying to do. We are having new storage servers installed that will be using NFS. I'm being told that they need to have their connections port channeled. Right now, the servers have connections to 2 different 3750s for HA. Is it possible to configure a port channel between these 2 connections?
I have a Cisco 6500 series switch with VS-C6509E-S720-10G ,I have two redundant supervisors between two chassis on the LAN with no add-on line cards ?
I need to know if I can use the redundant supervisor 10 Gb uplinks to form a layer-2 Port channel between the two 6500 switches as i do not want to use want to keep the port idle additionally I need more bandwidth between the two switches for my server farm?
I have 2 cisco 6500 in a VSS configuration , All of my Lan access switches are Stack switches and every Stack is connected to the VSS in a Port-channel so basically this is a loop free environment with no blocked ports .As a best practice I left STP in the Background (mstp)which enhanced cisco features to STP should I configure on the Aggregator (6500-VSS) and on the Access switches ?
Because of my topology I dont see the need in configuring most features like Uplink Fast and Backbone Fast but I have configured Loop Guard in addition to UDLD on the 6500 Aggregation Switches (on the port-channels).On the access ports I have configured portfast , bpduguard and guard root (seems a little pointless to configure the two...)
1.should I Leave UDLD on and get rid of LoopGuard and configure Guard root instead ? since LoopGuard cannot be configured with Guard Root.
2.should I configure GuardRoot on access ports if I already have BpduGuard on them ?
3.Is there anything I need to configure on the physicall interface or is everything configured on the port-channel since STP reguards port- channel as a single interface ?
I am trying to create a port channel between HP servers (4 nic) and two nexus 2k. The server side its a single team with 803.2ad fault taulerence and on the nexus side it have created two port channel (port channel 1 for nexus 2k1 and port channel 2 for nexus 2k2) and made them ACTIVE (channel group mode active)
But when i add a another server on different ports and port channel them the same way as the above server on nexus 2k1 and nexus 2k2, the first server stops pinging. so i have to sht down the first port channel and reopen them - then it works, however it says NO NETWORK ACCESS on the servers (running windows 2008). the only way is to reboot the server i cant be doing this on a production network.
I have a customer that would like a 40Gb port-channel between two 3750-x switch stacks. When I try to activate four 10Gb ports in the channel, they go into error-disable. However, I am able to create a 20Gb port-channel without issue. I have had my configurations verified to Cisco best practice.
Is there a limitation on the amount of throughput that the 3750-x can handle? According to the data sheet the 3750X-48T can handle 101.2mpps, based on two 10Gb uplinks so if my math is correct then a stack of two 3750X-48T should be able to handle 202.4mpps.
Is it possible to use a 10GE interface on a sup720 and an interface from a 671610GE line card and create a port channel. I haven't found specific documentation on CCO stating you can. I have found the QOS queuing is differnet between the sup and line card.
I am having hard time in understanding the hardware port channel resource concept in Nexus 5Ks. Which scenario is considered as a hardware port channel and which is not. According to Cisco documentation, 5548UP switch with layer 3 daughter card only supports 8 hardware port channels, does this mean we can connect only 8 dual homed Fex to those 5Ks.Will a dual homed fex consumes a hardware port channel?
I have two Core 6509E SUP2T configued as VSS and has two 48 ports fiber blades. I have two 3750s, I have two gig on each 3750 port-channle to po1 and connected to both the core, one link to each core.Now, I was asked ot add two more links on each 3750 switch to make it a total of 4 gigs on each 3750s (all 4 gig ports/uplinks will be in used an dtwo links to core one an dtwo links to core 2).when i added two additional links on 3750s and bundled them to po1, I created another port channel on core and bundeled the additional two gigs on each core to accomodate for the two additional links (ports on core switches are not consequtives).
adding these two additional ports makes the 3750 switches flap between managemnet vlan and po1.now, i am not sure if I must have added the two additional links on the core to teh current port-channel or core!? I have created another port-channel on core to accomodate for this currently!?
I am a bit confused by the output of 'show run' and 'show run switch-profile' that pertains to a port-channel interface configured in a switch-profile. My main gaol is to find out how can I add/remove the allowed vlans the port-channel (configured as trunk) carries. The setup is like this. I have 2 N5k in vPC domain and Etherner1/11 on both switches is configured as trunk vPC that connects to a core switch. When I issue ‘show run’ for the port-channel and physical interface I get the following output. [code] From above it seems the switch-profile configuration is missing the 'switchport trunk allowed vlan' in the port-channel interface. If want I to remove vlan 30 from the allowed vlan, should I go under the switch-profile mode and remove vlan 30 from the allowed list even though the switch-profile configuration seems to be missing this.