Excellent point Steve. I really need to remember this kind of lateral thinking.

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Di Bias, Steve
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Marc I'm not sure why that happened but if you aren't restricted on one side 
> you could hardcode "trunk" and the other can stay dynamic desirable. In this 
> way there will be no access port negotiations going on and you shouldn't have 
> this issue. Remember that if the lab states that one side should look like 
> this:
>
> Port        Mode             Encapsulation  Status        Native vlan
> Gi0/19      desirable        n-802.1q       trunking      1
> Gi0/20      desirable        n-802.1q       trunking      1
>
> That doesn't mean the other side can't look like this:
>
> Port        Mode             Encapsulation  Status        Native vlan
> Gi0/19      on               802.1q         trunking      1
> Gi0/20      on               802.1q         trunking      1
>
> :)
>
> SW1(config-if-range)#do sh run int gig0/19
> Building configuration...
>
> Current configuration : 173 bytes
> !
> interface GigabitEthernet0/19
>  switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
>  switchport trunk allowed vlan 3,11,13,44,45
>  switchport mode trunk
>  channel-group 12 mode active
> end
>
> SW1(config-if-range)#
> SW1(config-if-range)#do sh run int gig0/20
> Building configuration...
>
> Current configuration : 173 bytes
> !
> interface GigabitEthernet0/20
>  switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
>  switchport trunk allowed vlan 3,11,13,44,45
>  switchport mode trunk
>  channel-group 12 mode active
> end
>
>
> SW2(config-if-range)#do sh run int gig0/19
> Building configuration...
>
> Current configuration : 140 bytes
> !
> interface GigabitEthernet0/19
>  switchport trunk allowed vlan 2-4094
>  switchport mode dynamic desirable
>  channel-group 12 mode active
> end
>
> SW2(config-if-range)#do sh run int gig0/20
> Building configuration...
>
> Current configuration : 140 bytes
> !
> interface GigabitEthernet0/20
>  switchport trunk allowed vlan 2-4094
>  switchport mode dynamic desirable
>  channel-group 12 mode active
> end
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Steve Di Bias
> Network Engineer - Information Systems
> Valley Health System - Las Vegas
> Office - 702- 369-7594
> Cell - 702-241-1801
> [email protected]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JM NGOK
> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 9:07 AM
> To: Dwann Hall; marc abel
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Ether-channel error
>
> Correct if I am wrong Marc is talking about activating trunk to create 
> port-channel interface. These interfaces can't inherit the port-channel if 
> trunking is flapping.  So he was looking to fix this trunking issue  and now 
> it's done.
>
>
>
>      Jean-Marie NGOK
>  Senior Network Engineer
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Dwann Hall <[email protected]>
> To: marc abel <[email protected]>
> Cc: mark salmon <[email protected]>; JM NGOK <[email protected]>; Adam Booth 
> <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" 
> <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 11:56 AM
> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Ether-channel error
>
> not sure if you did it or not, but aside from assigning channel-group
> and making it a switchport to members, switchport type, etc should be
> applied to port-channel so that members inherit config -d
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:32 AM, marc abel <[email protected]> wrote:
>> For all of you who keep posting this, I posted the configs earlier in
>> the thread. ALL THE MEMBERS WERE SET AS DYNAMIC DESIRABLE. NONE were
>> set as access ports. I had them all shutdown when I configured the
>> channel-group and yes I used the interface range. They initially all
>> negotiated as trunks. Then for whatever reason one would become an
>> access port and un-bundle. Then a bit later it would trunk again. I
>> know I can manually set it as a trunk but I was restricted due to
>> other lab requirements. Specifically the task asks for an exact show
>> int trunk output that indicates it should be set to dynamic.
>>
>> Removing and re-applying the exact same channel-group command seemed
>> to stabilize the etherchannel, so I don't know what the actual issue
>> was but it appears it was some sort of "glitch".
>>
>> Cat1
>> ________________________
>>
>> interface FastEthernet0/23
>>  switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
>>  switchport mode dynamic desirable
>>  channel-group 12 mode active
>> !
>> interface FastEthernet0/24
>>  switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
>>  switchport mode dynamic desirable
>>  channel-group 12 mode active
>> !
>>
>>
>> Cat2
>> ___________________________
>>
>> interface FastEthernet0/23
>>  switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
>>  switchport mode dynamic desirable
>>  channel-group 12 mode active
>> !
>> interface FastEthernet0/24
>>  switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
>>  switchport mode dynamic desirable
>>  channel-group 12 mode active
>> !
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Dwann Hall <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I think others have answered but the problem and its resolution are
>>> included in the error message. The etherchannel members must be the
>>> same. For whatever reasone one interface is operating in access mode
>>> while the other is in trunking mode. Do a "sh int f0/x switchport".I
>>> would manually set switchport mode and not rely on dtp. -d
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 7:49 PM, mark salmon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I agree, defaulting both physical ports (also deleting the port channel) 
>>>> then re configuring both using the range command. It appears one of the 
>>>> physical ports is set for dynamic desirable and the other is hard coded to 
>>>> trunk unconditionally.
>>>>
>>>> "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be 
>>>> one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of 
>>>> blind-folded fear." Thomas Jefferson
>>>> " Where ignorance is bliss 'tis folly to be wise"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>>  From: JM NGOK <[email protected]>
>>>> To: Adam Booth <[email protected]>; marc abel <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2011 6:45 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Ether-channel error
>>>>
>>>> Shutdown these ports and delete the port-channel interface. Paste Adam's 
>>>> configuration ,reconfigure the port-channel and bring these interfaces up.
>>>>
>>>> Am I wrong?
>>>>
>>>>      Jean-Marie NGOK
>>>>  Senior Network Engineer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Adam Booth <[email protected]>
>>>> To: marc abel <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2011 3:50 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Ether-channel error
>>>>
>>>> Hi Marc,
>>>>
>>>> Do Fa0/23 and Fa0/24 have the same configurations?  For example is one port
>>>> switch access for instance, with the other able to negotiate a trunk using
>>>> DTP?
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps look at hard setting the interfaces to what you want
>>>>
>>>> switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
>>>> switchport mode trunk
>>>> switchport nonegotiate
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Adam
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 5:54 AM, marc abel <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have two dynamic desirable trunks configured as an ether-channel and
>>>>> one keeps un-bundling
>>>>>
>>>>> Nov 20 19:49:06.347: %EC-5-CANNOT_BUNDLE2: Fa0/23 is not compatible
>>>>> with Fa0/24 and will be suspended (trunk mode of Fa0/23 is access,
>>>>> Fa0/24 is trunk)
>>>>> Nov 20 19:49:07.335: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface
>>>>> FastEthernet0/23, changed state to down
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It then comes back up and everything seems fine for a bit and then it
>>>>> happens again. Any idea what the issue could be or how to
>>>>> troubleshoot? Obviously I could configure them as statically trunking
>>>>> but a lab requirement prevents this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>>>>> Marc
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
>>>>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
>>>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>>>>
>>>>> To Unsubscribe from this list please visit the following link and follow
>>>>> the directions to unsubscribe.
>>>>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>>>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>>
>>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
>>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>>>
>>>> To Unsubscribe from this list please visit the following link and follow 
>>>> the directions to unsubscribe. 
>>>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>>>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>>
>>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
>>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>>>
>>>> To Unsubscribe from this list please visit the following link and follow 
>>>> the directions to unsubscribe. 
>>>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>>>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>>
>>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
>>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>>>
>>>> To Unsubscribe from this list please visit the following link and follow 
>>>> the directions to unsubscribe. 
>>>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
>>>>
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>
> To Unsubscribe from this list please visit the following link and follow the 
> directions to unsubscribe. http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
>
>
> UHS Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, 
> is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may contain 
> confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use, 
> disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited.  If this was 
> sent to you in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy 
> all copies of the original message.
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

To Unsubscribe from this list please visit the following link and follow the 
directions to unsubscribe. http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs

Reply via email to