11-22-2013 12:44 PM - edited 03-07-2019 04:44 PM
Dear Team,
Can you any have any idea on below.
I have 3560 cisco switch and created port-channel and assign the two port to Po1 switch is connected to HP VC.
The issue is only one port is highly utilizing and on other port no traffic is there.
Plz find below config for your reference.
Cisco 3560
Switch1#sh etherchannel su
Flags: D - down P - bundled in port-channel
I - stand-alone s - suspended
H - Hot-standby (LACP only)
R - Layer3 S - Layer2
U - in use f - failed to allocate aggregator
M - not in use, minimum links not met
u - unsuitable for bundling
w - waiting to be aggregated
d - default port
Number of channel-groups in use: 4
Number of aggregators: 4
Group Port-channel Protocol Ports
------+-------------+-----------+-----------------------------------------------
1 Po1(SU) LACP Gi0/28(P) Gi0/30(P)
2 Po2(SU) - Gi0/22(P) Gi0/23(P) Gi0/24(P)
Gi0/25(P) Gi0/26(P) Gi0/27(P)
3 Po3(SU) - Gi0/6(P) Gi0/7(P) Gi0/8(P)
Gi0/9(P) Gi0/10(P) Gi0/11(P)
4 Po4(SU) - Gi0/1(P) Gi0/14(P)
Switch1#sh run int po1
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 166 bytes
!
interface Port-channel1
description HP VC
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlanXXXX
switchport mode trunk
end
Switch1#sh run int g0/28
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 223 bytes
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/28
description HP VC server
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan XXXX
switchport mode trunk
channel-protocol lacp
channel-group 1 mode active
end
Switch1#sh run int g0/30
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 223 bytes
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/30
description HP VC server
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan XXXX
switchport mode trunk
channel-protocol lacp
channel-group 1 mode active
end
Switch1#
Regards,
Prasad
Solved! Go to Solution.
12-14-2013 05:49 AM
Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
If you're seeing a load imbalance TO the switch (i.e. from your server), then you need to see if your server has any load balancing options as the switch has no control over that.
If you're seeing load imbalance FROM the switch (i.e. to your server), then your need to select the best load balancing hash algorithm, for your traffic characteristics. Often the switch's default is not the best. Often using both source and destination IP addresses works well.
Realize sometimes the switch doesn't offer a good load balancing hash algorithm for your traffic. For example, if most of your traffic was between two hosts (e.g. replication), all that traffic would take the same link. (Note: a 6500 offers hash that includes port numbers for such situations, but 3K switches do not.)
This link http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/etherchannel/12023-4.html, explains your choices on different Cisco switches.
11-22-2013 01:03 PM
What is HP VC server? What is it sending traffic to? And where from is it reciving traffic? Which hashing algorithm are you using? Can you show the interface counters.
Daniel Dib
CCIE #37149
12-14-2013 05:23 AM
Dear Dani,
Thanks for your update and sorry for late reply,
We have HP blade server connected through (HP VC) and taking back up on blade servers through DP on Network base, and we are using default hashing algorithm.
Switch1#sh int counters
Port InOctets InUcastPkts InMcastPkts InBcastPkts
Gi0/1 4562927656484 66392875186 1847483 0
Gi0/2 13176542586 71713707 0 25531
Gi0/3 1900362462 13767303 0 0
Gi0/4 1509867072 261 0 23588493
Gi0/5 1890453212 13696932 0 0
Gi0/6 14544362704314 10480956031 1847117 0
Gi0/7 65538886024236 51305371079 1847117 46220
Gi0/8 4250911026 27430358 1847117 493967
Gi0/9 3278139491 21581493 1847117 0
Gi0/10 2239812209312 1668516659 1847117 0
Gi0/11 18977644290 40381156 1847117 0
Gi0/12 7106828728 40409414 0 21914
Gi0/13 60966452542 117821737 0 44747
Gi0/14 6658811930336 97266413481 1847483 76539
Gi0/15 660361512073 9558185434 0 26820
Gi0/16 4517384940 32731826 0 589
Gi0/17 6176748 37920 6 36600
Gi0/18 13170490194 72004734 0 16047
Gi0/19 399068 270 0 52
Gi0/20 1511299084 228 0 23608627
Gi0/21 4810427256500 4525067782 923248 72519
Port InOctets InUcastPkts InMcastPkts InBcastPkts
Gi0/22 45570313835 305457187 1847099 46240
Gi0/23 916003605666 2260702749 1847099 17829
Gi0/24 16654479345028 12407925561 1847099 143800
Gi0/25 86272576072349 64157011758 1847099 0
Gi0/26 664849496052 1058961267 1847099 17947
Gi0/27 64763004823 146421633 1847099 21143
Gi0/28 261920056168395 191200404985 1824999 0
Gi0/29 5725072524 41484456 0 0
Gi0/30 26329857235463 19046331944 38155322 55863157
Gi0/31 1172532292 0 12980893 92
Gi0/32 5284664422 0 16298718 38370336
Gi0/33 945391966 4272721 515272 366064
12-14-2013 05:49 AM
Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
If you're seeing a load imbalance TO the switch (i.e. from your server), then you need to see if your server has any load balancing options as the switch has no control over that.
If you're seeing load imbalance FROM the switch (i.e. to your server), then your need to select the best load balancing hash algorithm, for your traffic characteristics. Often the switch's default is not the best. Often using both source and destination IP addresses works well.
Realize sometimes the switch doesn't offer a good load balancing hash algorithm for your traffic. For example, if most of your traffic was between two hosts (e.g. replication), all that traffic would take the same link. (Note: a 6500 offers hash that includes port numbers for such situations, but 3K switches do not.)
This link http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/etherchannel/12023-4.html, explains your choices on different Cisco switches.
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