Re: [c-nsp] fabricpath and vPC+
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps9441/ps9402/white_paper_c07-728188.pdf take it with a grain of salt — as some of it is very marketecture related. q. -- quinn snyder snyd...@gmail.com On 13-Nov-13, at 10:23 , Arne Larsen / Region Nordjylland wrote: > Hi all > > What is the correct setup when one is using fabricpath and vPC+ > If 2 5k are direct connected with 2 10G fabricpath interfaces, should these 2 > be a channel group > or doesn't it really matter, because of the equal cost routing in isis > > /Arne > > ___ > 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/ ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] fabricpath and vPC+
Use port channels. In a FabricPath topology, loop-free trees are created to forward multidestination frames (broadcast, multicast, etc.). If you use individual links between switches, only one of those links will be a part of the tree. If you use port channels, the entire port channel will be used. Additionally, though I doubt it matters in most deployments, with port channels you'll have 2-16x fewer ISIS adjacencies (reduced CPU utilization). James -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Arne Larsen / Region Nordjylland Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 11:23 AM To: 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net' Subject: [c-nsp] fabricpath and vPC+ Hi all What is the correct setup when one is using fabricpath and vPC+ If 2 5k are direct connected with 2 10G fabricpath interfaces, should these 2 be a channel group or doesn't it really matter, because of the equal cost routing in isis /Arne ___ 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/ ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] fabricpath and vPC+
At 09:23 AM 11/13/2013 Wednesday, Arne Larsen / Region Nordjylland quipped: Hi all What is the correct setup when one is using fabricpath and vPC+ If 2 5k are direct connected with 2 10G fabricpath interfaces, should these 2 be a channel group or doesn't it really matter, because of the equal cost routing in isis If you really want VPC+, then yes it should be a port channel and configured as the VPC peer link. PL & PKA are required in VPC+ just like in VPC. If you don't need VPC+, then yes you could just do parallel FP links and use ECMP for load sharing instead of port-channel, it's your choice. Hope that helps, Tim /Arne ___ 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/ Tim Stevenson, tstev...@cisco.com Routing & Switching CCIE #5561 Distinguished Technical Marketing Engineer, Cisco Nexus 7000 Cisco - http://www.cisco.com IP Phone: 408-526-6759 The contents of this message may be *Cisco Confidential* and are intended for the specified recipients only. ___ 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/
[c-nsp] fabricpath and vPC+
Hi all What is the correct setup when one is using fabricpath and vPC+ If 2 5k are direct connected with 2 10G fabricpath interfaces, should these 2 be a channel group or doesn't it really matter, because of the equal cost routing in isis /Arne ___ 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/
