Also note you won’t get an even 33/33/33% split with three links with ether channel. You want 2, 4 or 8 for an even split. We have three links (same size) to one site and I ended up making two an ether channel for the bulk of my traffic and the 3rd I just use PVSTP+ to favor for some VLANs over the ether channel with auto-failover in case one of the two die.
> On Apr 14, 2015, at 4:23 PM, Sam Lambie <[email protected]> wrote: > > We currently have a Dragonwave Dual Mounted 2+0 PTP setup that is Ether > channeled with Cisco switches. Currently each radio link is at 300 mbps. Easy > to Ether channel as they are the same sized pipe. Once you get into links of > differing throughput, then Ether Channel will fill up to the smallest pipe > and the rest is wasted. > In the the next month, we are going to install another 2+0 link in the same > direction that should have up to 1.2 gb aggregate on that link alone. And 600 > mbps on the DW link. So my question is how to essentially bond both links of > differing sizes without wasting wireless throughput. Is there something > better than Ether channel? >
