- Community Home
- >
- Networking
- >
- Legacy
- >
- Switches, Hubs, Modems
- >
- Re: trunk required for switch <-> communication?
Switches, Hubs, and Modems
1752689
Members
5365
Online
108789
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
юдл
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
юдл
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Go to solution
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-19-2010 12:39 PM
тАО04-19-2010 12:39 PM
Hey everyone,
I've got trunks setup for my ProCurve<->ProCurve links however, I'm wondering if I need to create one from ProCurve<->SMC TigerSwitch
Since the SMC switch can't create a static trunk like the PowerEdge can, do I just create a trunk on the ProCurve?
Thanks!
Ben
I've got trunks setup for my ProCurve<->ProCurve links however, I'm wondering if I need to create one from ProCurve<->SMC TigerSwitch
Since the SMC switch can't create a static trunk like the PowerEdge can, do I just create a trunk on the ProCurve?
Thanks!
Ben
Solved! Go to Solution.
3 REPLIES 3
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-20-2010 02:32 AM
тАО04-20-2010 02:32 AM
Re: trunk required for switch <-> communication?
Does the SMC support LACP? If so you could try creating an LACP trunk instead.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-20-2010 07:37 AM
тАО04-20-2010 07:37 AM
Re: trunk required for switch <-> communication?
It sure does :) However, I'm a bit confused after my last post regarding LACP/Static trunks.
Hardware capabilities aside, when is it appropriate to use LACP instead of static trunks? Does a static trunk have performance or other benefits?
Thanks again!
Ben
Hardware capabilities aside, when is it appropriate to use LACP instead of static trunks? Does a static trunk have performance or other benefits?
Thanks again!
Ben
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО04-20-2010 09:35 AM
тАО04-20-2010 09:35 AM
Solution
Well for me the advantage of enabling LACP on certain switches was to allow the Server admins to just plug in multiple links for servers and have the trunks form dynamically.
I prefer static links when the configuration is just that, i.e. static, such as a switch-switch trunk.
Other advantages of LACP (shamelessly stolen from wikipedia :D )
# Failover when a link fails and there is (for example) a Media Converter between the devices which means that the peer will not see the link down. With static link aggregation the peer would continue sending traffic down the link causing it to be lost.
# The device can confirm that the configuration at the other end can handle link aggregation. With Static link aggregation a cabling or configuration mistake could go undetected and cause undesirable network behavior.
I prefer static links when the configuration is just that, i.e. static, such as a switch-switch trunk.
Other advantages of LACP (shamelessly stolen from wikipedia :D )
# Failover when a link fails and there is (for example) a Media Converter between the devices which means that the peer will not see the link down. With static link aggregation the peer would continue sending traffic down the link causing it to be lost.
# The device can confirm that the configuration at the other end can handle link aggregation. With Static link aggregation a cabling or configuration mistake could go undetected and cause undesirable network behavior.
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
News and Events
Support
© Copyright 2024 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP