Re: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel

2004-07-29 Thread Robert Blayzor
Ben Buxton wrote: On a related note - is it possible to get a 650x switch to perform flow based etherchannel load balancing, WITHOUT the switch actually routing (ie performing purely swithcing functions)?? I believe you then have to play around with the frame distribution settings in the Cat to ma

Re: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel

2004-07-29 Thread Ben Buxton
Robert Blayzor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> uttered the following thing: > > >of the links to be used. > > > >Use method 2 especially if you mean this to be a L3 handoff to the > >customer. > > What Mike states is correct about the layer2 vs layer3 load balancing: > > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/customer

Re: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel

2004-07-27 Thread Robert Blayzor
Mike Sawicki wrote: I would use method #2 above.. L3 FEC produces better balancing results as it is flow based, rather than mac-based. I'm not 100% certain that using the SVI interface would not produce a proper balance, but I doubt it. Using method one I would expect only one of the links to be

RE: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel

2004-07-27 Thread Michel Py
> Richard J. Sears wrote: > I am running a 6509 with Dual SUP720's in IOS mode only >(no cat software). It was pointed out that there are really > two different ways to configure the switch - I guess my > question is which is the best (lowest overhead, etc)? The two you posted are equivalent; th

Re: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel

2004-07-27 Thread Robert Blayzor
Richard J. Sears wrote: I am building out a customer that needs more than 1000Mbps of sustained bandwidth. Because of the customer equipment, etherchannel was suggested as the means to do this (it is compatible with this customers equipment). I am running a 6509 with Dual SUP720's in IOS mode only

Re: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel

2004-07-27 Thread Mike Sawicki
On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 07:23:29PM -0700, Richard J. Sears wrote: > > Hey Everyone, > > I am building out a customer that needs more than 1000Mbps of sustained > bandwidth. Because of the customer equipment, etherchannel was suggested > as the means to do this (it is compatible with this custom

Re: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel

2004-07-27 Thread Richard J. Sears
Robert, Just a routed interface. On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 22:40:16 -0400 "Robert Crowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do you need VLAN support or just a routed interface ? > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Richard J. Sears > Sent: Tu

RE: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel

2004-07-27 Thread Robert Crowe
Do you need VLAN support or just a routed interface ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard J. Sears Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 10:23 PM To: Nanog Subject: COnfiguration Suggestion - Etherchannel Hey Everyone, I am building out a c