03-12-2018 10:25 AM - edited 03-05-2019 10:05 AM
Hello forum,
I found this setup and I was wondering if it is a valid setup to connect two routers via Etherchannel (LACP). One end as L3 with an IP address and the other side as L2 like the config below.
----------------------L3 Side (Cisco ASR1001)-----------------------
interface Port-channel2
ip address x.x.x.xx.x.x.x.x
no ip redirects
no ip unreachables
negotiation auto
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/2
no ip address
negotiation auto
channel-group 2 mode active
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/3
no ip address
negotiation auto
channel-group 2 mode active
-----------------------L2 Side (Cisco ASR 920)-----------------------
interface Port-channel4
no ip address
negotiation auto
service instance 800 ethernet
encapsulation untagged
bridge-domain 800
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/4
no ip address
media-type rj45
negotiation auto
cdp enable
channel-group 4 mode active
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/5
no ip address
media-type rj45
negotiation auto
cdp enable
channel-group 4 mode active
Issue I'm having is on the ASR920 side both interfaces are flaping in/out the etherchannel like the logs
Feb 05 17:19:30.406: GigabitEthernet0/0/4 taken out of port-channel4
Feb 05 17:19:31.267: GigabitEthernet0/0/4 added as member-2 to port-channel4
Feb 05 17:19:46.478: GigabitEthernet0/0/5 taken out of port-channel4
Feb 05 17:19:47.381: GigabitEthernet0/0/5 added as member-2 to port-channel4
Feb 05 17:20:51.949: GigabitEthernet0/0/4 taken out of port-channel4
Feb 05 17:20:52.840: GigabitEthernet0/0/4 added as member-2 to port-channel4
Feb 05 17:21:14.371: GigabitEthernet0/0/5 taken out of port-channel4
Feb 05 17:21:15.260: GigabitEthernet0/0/5 added as member-2 to port-channel4
Feb 05 17:22:14.560: GigabitEthernet0/0/4 taken out of port-channel4
Feb 05 17:22:14.806: GigabitEthernet0/0/4 added as member-2 to port-channel4
Feb 05 17:22:41.367: GigabitEthernet0/0/5 taken out of port-channel4
Feb 05 17:22:42.322: GigabitEthernet0/0/5 added as member-2 to port-channel4
Thanks for any help
Solved! Go to Solution.
03-12-2018 11:24 AM
I believe that what you have here is not a valid implementation. When you are doing Etherchannel it can be treated as layer 2 or as layer 3. But both ends of the Etherchannel need to treat it the same way.
HTH
Rick
03-12-2018 11:24 AM
I believe that what you have here is not a valid implementation. When you are doing Etherchannel it can be treated as layer 2 or as layer 3. But both ends of the Etherchannel need to treat it the same way.
HTH
Rick
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide