Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
> 
> Hello folks,
> 
> Somehow I got into a "back-to-back" conversation with one of
> our colleagues and nobody else has been responding. :-{} So I
> decided to repost with the remaining questions. It's a
> production bank network, so he is hoping to get some answers
> before trying anything.
> 
> Two 6xxx switches are connected back-to-back across a trunk
> link with 2 sets of ports channeled together to form the trunk.
> 
> To solve a problem, he needs to make a permanent CAM entry on
> one of the switches that associates a MAC address with the trunk.
> 
> Since it's a channel, we're not sure which mod/ports to use as
> parameters to the "set cam perm" command. Supervisor port 1/1,
> 1/2 or both?
> 
> When you do a "set cam perm" on a trunk, documentation says you
> have to include a VLAN number. The trunk is part of the
> management VLAN. Is that the VLAN it wants? Or does it want the
> VLAN that the destination is on? (Hopefully that VLAN is
> already associated with the trunk.)
> 
> For more background, see the dicussion on Cat 6xxx and
> firewalls in a cluster, but I think our best hope at this point
> is to get answers to these specific questions.
> 
> THANKS
> 
> Priscilla
>  

Priscilla,

A quick look through the relevant chapters of Release 7.3 of the Catalyst
6000 Family Software Configuration Guide reveals nothing on static CAM
entries.  Reference to the 'set cam perm' command is made on CCO but makes
no attempt to explain how the behavior of a permanent CAM entry interacts
with the behavior of Etherchannel:
 
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/products_command_reference_chapter09186a00800fb5d6.html#13648

A proof-of-concept test or TAC case may be the only options (hopefully
someone will prove me wrong).


Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=60456&t=60448
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to