Portchannel issue with Switch Embedded Teaming on Windows server 2022

[alex1988]

Hi all,

I am facing an issue with a portchannel I am trying to set up for a windows server 2022. The servers team has requested to provide two ports. They are not using LACP on the server, but SET (Switch Embedded Teaming). I proceeded to create a portchannel as usual:

interface Port-channel1
switchport
switchport mode trunk

The same config was applied to the physical interfaces, along with the command "channel-group 1 mode active", but the interfaces get suspended and I see the below log in the switch:

%EC-5-L3DONTBNDL2: Gi9/27 suspended: LACP currently not enabled on the remote port.

I also tried the command with mode on, desirable and passive, but every time the interface gets suspended.

Has anyone stumbled upon a same issue?  Is there a suggested configuration for the cisco switch when SET is used on the remote server? The switch model is Cisco 4510E.

Thank you!

[marce1000 · Accepted solution]

 - Try to leave them as standalone (access/host-mode)  at the cisco side , just two network links to a host, let Windows handle the teaming (using SET) , check what happens , 

 M.

[alex1988]

Hi marce1000, thank you for your reply.

So, you mean to just create two trunk ports and no portchannel?

[Reza Sharifi · Accepted solution]

Hi,

So, you mean to just create two trunk ports and no portchannel?

Yes, as Marce said it correctly, there is no need for a Portchannel. Just use 2 physical links and let the server do the load balancing and failover.

HTH

[marce1000]

  - You only need trunk links if the windows server would deal with different vlans (tagging) , otherwise don't use a trunk link (port in host-mode) , 

 M.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Just reading up a bit on SET.  It appears all it needs is typical server host links, w/o Etherchanneling.  In fact, it appears it would even be happy with links to different (including logical) switches.

[alex1988]

Great, indeed I tried it and it works this way. One last question though, without etherchanneling, does the bandwidth aggregate on the switch side (2Gbps towards the server)?

[marce1000]

                       >...does the bandwidth aggregate on the switch side (2Gbps towards the server) 
 - Use network monitoring tools , to monitor traffic on the involved ports on the switch , lots of free tools available or Windows Task Manager -> Performance (Networking) may provide some insights too

  M.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Or, even, compare each port's stats (on the switch itself).

Are packet counts, more or less, balanced in both directions?

I recall (many) years ago, server teaming was only server egress.  In my recent look at SET, didn't see mention of this.