cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
420
Views
1
Helpful
4
Replies

what problem will face if we will add 9 physical port in etherchannel

kousikdutta
Level 1
Level 1

Hi All,

I have a quarry that what will happen if we add 1 or 2 physical port in port-channel.

 

However cisco TAC is recommending to bind 4 physical port in port channel, Kindly help me get the clarity on this.

4 Accepted Solutions

Accepted Solutions

shambhu.kumar
Spotlight
Spotlight

You can assign up to 16 physical interfaces to an EtherChannel, but only eight interfaces will be active at a time.

https://community.cisco.com/t5/switching/etherchannel-max-number-of-ports/td-p/3189881

View solution in original post

Joseph W. Doherty
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

Using a 9 port Eitherchannel, I recall (?), is not a feature of earlier implementations and in later implementations up to 16 ports can be configured but only 8 actively used, the latter as also noted by @shambhu.kumar .

BTW, when you have a bandwidth need for, perhaps, 4 or more ports, if possible, you may want to consider using fewer ports that offer more bandwidth.  (Also keep in mind, fewer higher bandwidth ports generally provide more effective bandwidth than Etherchannel's aggregate bandwidth.  Fewer such ports might even be less expensive especially when adding in cost of optical transceivers.)

View solution in original post

It recommend not mandatory' you can use up to 16 it depend on you.

Also I have 24 port SW if I use 9 for PO there will be only 15 ports for host.

MHM

 

MHM

View solution in original post

". . . you can use up to 16 it depend on you."

For clarification, you can configure up to 16 ports, but only 8 will be actively used.

Also BTW, 8 ports was a limitation of Cisco's earlier PAgP, while the later LACP allowed a total of 16 ports, but only 8 activity passing transit traffic.  (I recall [???} Cisco might not have supported LACP's 16 links when LACP was initially added as an alternative to PAgP.)

View solution in original post

4 Replies 4

shambhu.kumar
Spotlight
Spotlight

You can assign up to 16 physical interfaces to an EtherChannel, but only eight interfaces will be active at a time.

https://community.cisco.com/t5/switching/etherchannel-max-number-of-ports/td-p/3189881

Joseph W. Doherty
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

Using a 9 port Eitherchannel, I recall (?), is not a feature of earlier implementations and in later implementations up to 16 ports can be configured but only 8 actively used, the latter as also noted by @shambhu.kumar .

BTW, when you have a bandwidth need for, perhaps, 4 or more ports, if possible, you may want to consider using fewer ports that offer more bandwidth.  (Also keep in mind, fewer higher bandwidth ports generally provide more effective bandwidth than Etherchannel's aggregate bandwidth.  Fewer such ports might even be less expensive especially when adding in cost of optical transceivers.)

It recommend not mandatory' you can use up to 16 it depend on you.

Also I have 24 port SW if I use 9 for PO there will be only 15 ports for host.

MHM

 

MHM

". . . you can use up to 16 it depend on you."

For clarification, you can configure up to 16 ports, but only 8 will be actively used.

Also BTW, 8 ports was a limitation of Cisco's earlier PAgP, while the later LACP allowed a total of 16 ports, but only 8 activity passing transit traffic.  (I recall [???} Cisco might not have supported LACP's 16 links when LACP was initially added as an alternative to PAgP.)

Review Cisco Networking for a $25 gift card