02-06-2025 12:56 AM
Hi,
we have a georedundant dark-fiber connection between two company sites.
We're using a setup of 2 9336C-FX2 on each site, where each switch is directly linked to a single peer on the other site.
The 2 switches in each site are linked using vPC. We aggregate the two channels with LACP to make use of the redundancy.
Since the length of the actual fiber cables differs significantly, we do get almost twice the ping latency on the longer connection.
With our current setup, this however means, that depending on "seemingly random" factors (MAC/IP address) some machines get a 4ms and others a 8ms ping to the remote location.
Is there any way to change our setup to prioritize the faster connection as long as both links are up?
The link aggregation then should only switch to the slower connection if the faster connection is cut for some reason (somebody digging fiber cables out of the ground..)
In the ideal world, we would love to still "overflow" to the slower link, if the faster link is saturated.. but that's not as important as that isn't very likely to happen often.
Thanks for any feedback!
- Joachim
Solved! Go to Solution.
02-06-2025 02:15 AM
Perhaps . . .
If you want to prefer the one link over the other, don't use Etherchannel. Use the two links as standalone, and cost one better than the other (e.g. L2, STP; L3, IGP).
02-06-2025 02:15 AM
Perhaps . . .
If you want to prefer the one link over the other, don't use Etherchannel. Use the two links as standalone, and cost one better than the other (e.g. L2, STP; L3, IGP).
02-19-2025 05:30 AM
Perfect, using spanning tree protocol with differing costs does fit our usecase pretty well. Thanks!
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