Hello ladies and gents,
This might be an easy question for some of you, but I am still trying to see the benefit of dynamic Etherchannel configuration over static configuration. The amount of line commands are the same as shown in the example below, so there is no benefit on the configuration part, other than load-balancing and link failures. Thanks.
Example of comparing the amount of lines necessary to configure dynamic and static Etherchannel.
Example 1 - LACP Ethernchannel:
SW1(config)#interface range f0/23 - 24
SW1(config-if-range)#channel-group 1 mode active
SW1(config-if-range)#exit
SW1(config)#inter port-channel 1
SW1(config-if)#description Link to SW2
SW1(config-if)#switchport mode trunk
SW1(config-if)#switchport trunk native vlan 199
SW2(config)#inter range f0/23 - 24
SW2(config-if-range)#channel-group 1 mode active
SW2(config-if-range)#exit
SW2(config)#inter port-channel 1
SW2(config-if)#description Link to SW1
SW2(config-if)#switchport mode trunk
SW2(config-if)#switchport trunk native vlan 199
Example 2 - Static Etherchannel:
SW1(config)#inter range g0/1 - 2
SW1(config-if-range)#channel-group 3 mode on
SW1(config-if-range)#exit
SW1(config)#inter port-channel 3
SW1(config-if)#description Link to SW2
SW1(config-if)#switchport mode trunk
SW1(config-if)#switchport trunk native vlan 199
SW2(config)#inter range g0/1 - 2
SW2(config-if-range)#channel-group 3 mode on
SW2(config-if-range)#exit)
SW2(config)#inter port-channel 3
SW2(config-if)#description Link to SW1
SW2(config-if)#switchport mode trunk
SW2(config-if)#switchport trunk native vlan 199