Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 09:20:02 +1000 From: Antony Mawer <fbsd-net@mawer.org> To: Bart Van Kerckhove <bart@it-ss.be> Cc: =?ISO-8859-9?Q?=D6zkan_KIRIK?= <ozkan@mersin.edu.tr>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: LACP 802.3ad and ng_fec ? Message-ID: <45146FA2.8070208@mawer.org> In-Reply-To: <00ed01c6de77$8968f770$020b000a@bartwrkstxp> References: <4513A5D1.4000604@mersin.edu.tr> <4513AC94.8040609@mawer.org> <45142ED1.1000204@mersin.edu.tr> <00ed01c6de77$8968f770$020b000a@bartwrkstxp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 23/09/2006 4:47 AM, Bart Van Kerckhove wrote: > Özkan KIRIK <ozkan@mersin.edu.tr> wrote: >> Thanks for your reply, >> >> It seems that HP ProCurve 5400 series doesn't support fec trunking : >> >> hp(config)# trunk A3-a5 trk1 fec >> Invalid input: fec >> >> hp(config)# trunk A3-a5 trk1 ? >> trunk Do not use any protocol to create or maintain >> the trunk. >> lacp Use IEEE 802.1ad Link Aggregation protocol. >> <cr> >> hp(config)# >> >> Can ng_fec handshake with switch via "trunk" option instead of "fec" ? > According to HP docs, FEC should "work" with the 'trunk' setting. > It will loose all features tough, and just become a 'dumb' bonding-style > thing, with no redundancy and other features. Yes, I was reading some HP docs yesterday and they implied that they were removing FEC on newer switches in favour of using the IEEE standards-based methods of trunking. I wonder how dissimilar FEC and IEEE LACP are from one another? ie. how much of the code from ng_fec could be used to implement an ng_lacp... --Antony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45146FA2.8070208>