From: Joseph Saad (joseph.samir.saad@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Mar 18 2008 - 01:56:55 ART
The load-balancing configuration determines how the traffic goes "OUT" of
the switch, hence the local significance.
Joseph, #20243
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 3:15 AM, Kevin Howard <kevin@leh.net> wrote:
> thanks for the replies. No, I didn't actually run traffic, I was thinking
> some config errors would show up right away. Locally significant is
> interesting thought, it does make sense.
>
> >
> >
> > When you say you lab it up & there are no errors - are you running any
> > traffic over the links in your lab ?
> >
> > R
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kevin Howard" <kevin@leh.net>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 4:29 PM
> > Subject: etherchannel load balancing - same config on both sides
> >
> >
> >> Hello,
> >> in looking through the doccd I cannot find this answer - when
> >> configuring
> >> load-bal on etherchannel, does the load-balacing scheme chosen need to
> >> be
> >> same on each side? When I lab it matching and not matching, there are
> no
> >> errors indicating a problem, just want to check with the group.
> >>
> >> thanks.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 07:53:53 ART