RE: Interface bonding?

["Ross S. W. Walker" <rwalker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> > > 
> > I don't think you need to do all that:
> > 
> > Check out: 
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst2900xl_3500xl/release12.0_5_wc3/swg/Swgports.html
> > 
> 
> 	
> I've run 2900xl's connected to each other though 2 ports each 
> configured 
> with:
> port group 1 distribution destination
> but never tried it with anything non-cisco.

This should give you what you need when doing 802.3ad LAGs:

interface FastEthernet0/21
 port group 1
 spanning-tree portfast
!
interface FastEthernet0/22
 port group 1
 spanning-tree portfast
!

It might have been the lack of STP portfasting that gave you
trouble initially as the Linux LACP might have timed out
waiting for STP discovery to finish.

Here is a good wiki article on link aggregation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation

And here is a good site on Linux bonding interface:
http://www.linux-foundation.org/en/Net:Bonding

You only need to setup port groups when doing 802.3ad, if
you use the other methods you may need to tune out the
2900XL for the constantly shifting MAC addresses.

-Ross

______________________________________________________________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos