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?
View 4 RepliesWe 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.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI 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]
View 5 Replies View RelatedWe are currently designing Layer 3 to the edge EIGRP solution for our customers. The network is a hybrid of collapsed core (Core to access) as well as a three layer design (Core/Distro/Access) for connectivity to the Data Centre, Internet, Wireless Blocks etc.The core of the network contains two 6509-E switches interconnected on a Layer 3 Port channel (no VSS). Access Layer switches (3750-X series running Stackwiseplus protocol) connect to the core switches over p2p routed links and Distribution layer switches (3750X stackwiseplus) provide connectivity to the Data centre, Internet, wireless blocks etc.
The access and distribution switch stacks(Cisco 3750-X) are set up with two or three member switches with uplinks multihomed to the primary and secondary core switch with each uplink included in EIGRP. In each of the stacks, one of the switches controls the operation of the stack, which will be the stack master.As the Cisco Stackwise architecture is not SSO-capable but NSF aware, all Layer 3 fuctions must be re-established during a master switch outage. To minimize control plane impact and improve Layer3 convergence, uplinks should be diverse and originate from the member switches instead of the Master switches in the respective stack. This is as per Cisco recommended design solution.The above solution can be setup if there are more than two switches in the stack. i.e. uplinks are configured on the backup member switch modules.
1.But what about stack with two switches..Which switch should be set up as the Master for a two member stack with uplinks to the core primary and secondary from each switch(Master and Backup)
2. For Layer 3 routing, does the routing takes precedene over switch failures? Say for eg. In a two member stack, the master switch with uplink to primary fails, does EIGRP provide a fast convergence to route traffic via backup secondary and does not wait for the control plane on the switch stack to converge? All the access to core links will be set up for ECMP.
I have a router on which I would like to create a port channel that spans two different Nexus 2248TP switches, and then create a couple subinterfaces on the router's po interface. I've done this successfully on my primary router, but the config doesn't seem to work on the backup router. The primary is running IOS 15, while the backup is running 12.4.25d advanced IP. I do see the trunk come up from the switch side, and my router subinterfaces and po interface show up, however I'm not able to get anywhere from the router. It's not even able to reach other hosts on the same network. As soon as I remove the port channel config and use the physical interface and assign the same address used on the port channel interface, everything works as expected and I have connectivity.
interface Port-channel21
no ip address
hold-queue 150 in
!
interface Port-channel21.248
encapsulation dot1Q 248 native
ip address 100.100.100.1 255.255.255.0
[URL]
can you stack a 3750 switch over fiber.....the answer is no, but the virtual switching supervisor 720-10G for the 6500 can create one virtual switch using two 6500s...
how can we get cisco to come up with a way for access switches to be stacked over fiber similar to above supervisor? i know of few of my site that would benefit from this...maybe they can come up with a vss appliance, similar to a media converter, to convert stackwise over fiber...then of course, you would need the same appliance on the other end....
Have 2 N2K with dual-connections to both 2 N5K, will all 4-ports of N5K will be the same port-channel. N2K as well ?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI need to configure a port channel between two sw 4507R. with port Giga, but those port are in different modules.
Sw-1
interface GigabitEthernet5/48
description **** Conexion Switch-2*****
[Code].....
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
View 1 Replies View RelatedI 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]
View 4 Replies View RelatedWe 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]
I set up a port-channel trunk between a acess switch 3750 ( int gi2/0/1 and gi2/0/2) and Core 6509( int gi7/11 and gi7/12).
On the both the 3750& 6509 I configured:
interface Port-channel15
switchport
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 100,103
switchport mode trunk
But the ports on the core g7/11 and g7/12 keep shutdown and when I do show interfaces port-channel 15, it show the interface is shutdown.
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.
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
[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.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have an inquiry about a configuration I deploy in a C2960 switch. I have configured a ether channel with 8 ports, the load balanced method is source mac address. The bundling protocol is LACP.
I have found the ether channel is not balanced as I expect. One of the eight interfaces is congested.
Code...
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.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI 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 would like to know how many port channel can i configured in the switch 3750 X ? and if there is a limitation by IOS ?
View 4 Replies View RelatedIs 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.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI need adding a vlan to the trunks bundled in port channel. I know how to add v lans to a port channel with Cisco IOS but with CAT OS.
I have 2 ports bundled to form ether channel in switch which is running CAT OS. There are already few v lans allowed in the trunk of each interface. now I need to add one more v lan.
For Example:-
v lan 135 needs to be added in addition to the existing v lans.
clear trunk1/2 1-112,115,117-134,136-4094
set trunk 1/2 on dot1q 113-114,116,135
and similarly on the 2nd interface
so if I add vlan135 to the trunk one after another will it cause any service disruption?
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?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI 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.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI configured the interfaces individually at L3 and could ping across each link Example:
4500 Switch 2: 6500 Switch 1
int t5/1 - int g3/17 1 Gig fiber link
tore down config
tried second set of interface
int t6/1 - int g8/17 1 Gig fiber link
Ping successful
[code]....
We have a couple of IBM blade chassis with Nexus 4000I 10G blade switch in it. Four 10G ports from each Nexus 4000I switch are bundled into a port channel and connected to Nexus 7K. On the 4k end, one port in the port channel is doing down and coming up as an idividual port. After few minutes it is going down again and coming up as a port-channel member port. It is happening quite offen. [code]
View 1 Replies View RelatedWhat I am attempting to achieve is to aggregate trunk ports out of a VMware server into a single logical connection to give as much bandwidth as possible, the switches are 3750X and are three stacked together with the server connections spread across the stack. What I am not sure about is if two port channel load balance protocols can happy co-exist on the switch, by default the switch is using MAC address load balancing and Vmware wants to use IP Source load balancing. As other trunks and channels exist on the switch I don't want to make a change that will affect the other live connections if changing this is a global setting and not local on the channel.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI has a issue about etherchannel beetwen 02 Catalyst 6500 switch, i need your comment about it. if you had any similar experience:
1.- On Catalyst Switch 6500-1: I configured interface port-channel 4 and associated it to G6/29 and G6/30 interface Port-channel4description IUU1_Gn1_HLIMSGSN01_Port_channel_6_29_6_30switchportswitchport trunk encapsulation dot1qswitchport trunk allowed vlan 406,408switchport mode trunkswitchport nonegotiatelogging event link-statusload-interval 30mls qos vlan-basedmls qos trust dscp!
2.- On Catalyst Switch 6500-2: I configured interface port-channel 4 and associated it to G6/29 and G6/30
interface Port-channel4
description IUU2_Gn2_HLIMSGSN01_Port_channel_6_29_6_30
switchport
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 407,409
[code]....
and i see output "show interface Po4A" up up on switch-1, "show interface Po4B" up up on switch-2
5.- In the show running-config not appear configured Po4A and Po4B. it only show on outputs
6.- Po4A and Po4 was not configured on neither switches, my question is why appear Po4A and Po4B on switch-1 and switch-2 respectively? and why Po4 appear in down down.
7.- I solved this issue by shutdown and not shutdown to the interfaces on both routers, currently all is OK.
a Customer ask me to configure a etherchannel between two Switches C3500 XL Version IOS 12.0 follow the first configuration what I done and the output error show me by switch:
Sw01(conf)# interface port-channel 1 % invalid input detected at '^' marker.
I have to do something before add an new port-channel interface ?? why the Sw01 does not accept my configuration ?
Possible to configure multichassis port-channel between a VSS and 3750X (Port-channel not in the same switch on the 3750X stack). I got it using LACP but I need Pagp to get VSL redundancy “dual-active detection pagp trust channel-group 1”. I am using the last VSS IOS version 15.0(1)SY. I can’t get the option “switch 1 preempt”, has it changed with other option?
View 2 Replies View Related