RE: VSS dual active detection mechanisms

2-3, doesn't need to have a 10G for Dual-Active, just a standard gig port would work. That's what we're using at least.

Those are the three. Personally, we waiting for SXI Code to come out specifically for fast-hello. As I recall the main reason was the convergence time. The other options were slower, more convoluted (PaGP was at least)

Unless someone would specifically have a reason for PaGP of IPBFD, go with Fast Hello. One of the networkers talks I sat in said that was the preferred method.

Hope this helps, good luck!
JB

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Koen Zeilstra
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 7:04 AM
To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Subject: OT: VSS dual active detection mechanisms

Hi group,

Here's a poll just out of curiousity.

Which of the three mechanisms Cisco provides is your favorite (or least
annoying :-)) .

1. dual active detection using PAgP
2. dual active detection using IP BFD
3. dual active detection using fast hello's

I personally dislike the fact that 1. is proprietary and as a result not
an option in a multivendor environment. Further more I would prefer
portchannels to be statically configured instead of dynamic.

2 en 3 require a direct layer2 ethernet connection, which is a waste of
ports (especially in a chassis which has only 10 G interfaces).

What's your opinion? Maybe there are more methods that I have overlooked.

thanks!

Cheers,

Koen

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Thu Oct 21 2010 - 10:04:51 ART