From: Chris Gray (chris.gray@ozonenetworks.net)
Date: Wed May 28 2008 - 18:18:27 ART
Very good question Dailong.
I have seen this type of question before and its difficult to answer since
3550 doesn't have the same options as 3560.
To my mind, so long as it is load balancing somehow, surely that's good
enough?
I think I am right in saying that until the port-channel load-balance
command is entered into a 35x0 switch, the etherchannels do not perform load
balancing..
Kriz
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Vazquez, Jorge
Sent: 28 May 2008 17:50
To: dailongli@aol.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: port-channel load-balance
I think you may need to configure it as port-channel dst-mac on the SW1
port-channel interface.
Jorge
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
dailongli@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 3:16 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: port-channel load-balance
Hi.all:
I have a question about port-channel load-balance.
This is my topology.
server--SW1======SW2. (sw1 is 3550,sw2 is 3560)
sw1 and sw2 are connected in trunk ,with portchannel 100.
There is a server connected to SW1,and divided into vlan 50.
There are many clients on SW2 in vlan 50 ,want to access the server.
So I configure port-channel load-balance dst-mac on SW1.
My question is that,Should I configure port-channel load-balance src-dst-mac
or
leave it default (src-mac)?
Is it better that load-balance based on src-dst-mac than src-mac?
thanks in advance.
Dailong
???
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2008 - 06:59:18 ART