Hi,
On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 05:28:04PM +, Drew Weaver wrote:
> Plan right now is to create the port-channel interface on both ends,
> duplicate the configuration from the existing interface and then plug in the
> 2nd cable.
>
> I expect that spanning tree will block the port-channel and nothing bad will
> happen.
>
> Then I will shut down the existing port which should change the port-channel
> from blocking to forwarding at this point I can just add the original
> interface to the port-channel.
The general plan is sane.
Now, there is spanning tree involved, so you'll see more or less downtime
still.
If you do rapid-pvstp (which I generally recommend), make sure that all
edge ports (= not linked to other switches) are properly tagged with
"spanning-tree portfast". Otherwise, they might see a "topology has
changed, re-learn port status" cycle, leading to downtime.
No idea about MST, won't touch that stuff with a pitchfork.
gert
--
"If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never doubted
it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
