<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Firepower Etherchannel issue - FTD in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4063763#M1069091</link>
    <description>HI Marvin, Thanks so much for your reply. I'm a bit sad to hear it because i need to change the design. With a vss scenario, the "mixed" port channel would been greatest approach. Do you think that it can be solved/changed with another fxos future release? or it's due to a hardware limitation? Thank you again,</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2020 21:35:57 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>fgariba</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-04-10T21:35:57Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Firepower Etherchannel issue - FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4062460#M1069022</link>
      <description>Hello everyone, i'm Fabio and i'm a new user in Cisco Community.Nice to meet you. I hope that this is the correct section of the community. I have an issue in the etherchannel configuration of an ftd: Firepower 2110 Version: 6.5.0.4 Locally managed FDM. I want to&amp;nbsp; configure a LACP link with two members: a copper port (for the local side of a VSS),&amp;nbsp; and a SFP Fiber MM 1G for connect to the remote switch. Port 1-12 native RJ-45 Port 13-16 SFP When i try to add the members (one RJ-45 native port and another SFP Fiber) it appears this message: "EtherChannel member interfaces cannot have different speed capabilities" and i can't go ahead. But of course both the RJ45 native port and the SFP 1G have negotiated at 1G full duplex. I did other tests: - two native RJ45 ports, works! - two SFP Fiber MM 1G works! - One SFP MM 1G and one SFP RJ-45 Works!!!!! Seems that members in the PortC can be only both RJ45 native or only both SFP (Fiber,copper or mixed) I don't understand if it's GUI problem, if i'm wrong something, or if it's a limitation of ftd. Please Help.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2020 07:22:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4062460#M1069022</guid>
      <dc:creator>fgariba</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-04-09T07:22:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Firepower Etherchannel issue - FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4062656#M1069040</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello Fabio,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;unfortunately it is impossible.&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;All interfaces in the channel group must be the same type and speed. The first interface added to the channel group determines the correct type and speed.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/firepower/650/fdm/fptd-fdm-config-guide-650/fptd-fdm-interfaces.html#id_111440" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/security/firepower/650/fdm/fptd-fdm-config-guide-650/fptd-fdm-interfaces.html#id_111440&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2020 11:38:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4062656#M1069040</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jewgeni Uschegow</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-04-09T11:38:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Firepower Etherchannel issue - FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4063507#M1069078</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi Evgenii,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thanks a lot for your response. I read that link...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Need to understand what it means the "same type"...&amp;nbsp;because&amp;nbsp; if i aggregate two different sfp type (one mm fiber and one copper) &lt;STRONG&gt;&lt;U&gt;it works&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/STRONG&gt;... and if i aggregate two RJ45 port - one native RJ45 and another SFP - &lt;U&gt;not working.&lt;/U&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So the "same type" means SFP or not... not clear for me.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks a lot&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:30:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4063507#M1069078</guid>
      <dc:creator>fgariba</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-04-10T15:30:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Firepower Etherchannel issue - FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4063589#M1069084</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;It is a bit confusing. Firepower (or more properly the FXOS) sees SFP modules as a different "type" than built-in Ethernet ports.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;A copper 1 Gbps SFP module is seen as a different type than a copper 1 Gbps built-in, while a copper SFP is considered the same type as a fiber 1 Gbps SFP module.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:36:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4063589#M1069084</guid>
      <dc:creator>Marvin Rhoads</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-04-10T16:36:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Firepower Etherchannel issue - FTD</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4063763#M1069091</link>
      <description>HI Marvin, Thanks so much for your reply. I'm a bit sad to hear it because i need to change the design. With a vss scenario, the "mixed" port channel would been greatest approach. Do you think that it can be solved/changed with another fxos future release? or it's due to a hardware limitation? Thank you again,</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2020 21:35:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/firepower-etherchannel-issue-ftd/m-p/4063763#M1069091</guid>
      <dc:creator>fgariba</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-04-10T21:35:57Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

