On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 02:57:04PM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote: > On Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:52:32 AM Chuck Anderson > wrote: > > > This is why when given a choice I always like to design > > L2 networks to not require dynamic protocols where > > possible. E.g. rely on autonegotiation's Remote Fault > > Indication (RFI) or Far End Fault Indication (FEFI) > > rather than using BFD/UDLD/CFM, use static link > > aggregation rather than LACP, use Virtual Chassis with > > distributed static AE interfaces rather than use MC-LAG > > or STP, etc. > > Can you use BFD on pure Layer 2 links? > > We've been running LACP for years and had no (major) > problems. Chances are that if your CPU is thrashing enough > to affect LACP, you're going to be having other problems > anyway. > > While on the subject, I think LAG's on the EX3200/4200 is > moot. The ASIC's don't load share :-(.
Not true according to these: http://forums.juniper.net/t5/Ethernet-Switching/EX4200-Aggregate-Hashing-Algorithm-Documentation/td-p/110130 http://forums.juniper.net/t5/Ethernet-Switching/EX2200-LACP-hashing-algorithm/m-p/107844#M4746 http://kb.juniper.net/InfoCenter/index?page=content&id=KB18219 _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
