Peter Rathlev schrieb:
>
> Maybe running LACP on the link ("channel-group 1 mode active") could
> help avoid the err-disable part. As far as I understand, you would end
> up with a one-member port-channel on each side, and then a standalone
> "I" port (independent) on the unchanged side facing a regular switchport
> on the "supervisor challenged" side. Spanning tree blocks one of the
> paths.
>
> I haven't tested this, just guessing.
>
> This doesn't solve the interface config going missing of course.
It wouldn't be the worst, if the interface starts without any config. This
would only happen, if one of the Sup's has a defect and is going to be
replaced. In this case, we could paste the config.
But if the Interface is acting the way described, the whole link is useless.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
