Phil,
Thanks, we're definitely going with LACP, for the reasons you mention.
Excellent to hear about your interoperability success. I think we may trust
in the Netgear in this case.
Interestingly, got some feedback on another list from a service provider
that they have recently swapped out their entire Cisco / HP / Extreme
network with Netgear GSM and have been very happy in all regards. A partner
of ours recommends the higher-end Netgear equipment as well.
Maybe it's time to rethink my "if it's not Cisco, it sucks" mentality.
Adam
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Brutsche" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: etherchannel compatibility
That's not necessarily a simple question to answer.
"EtherChannel" applies to both a Cisco-proprietary link bundling
protocol - Port Aggregation Protocol, aka PAgP - as well as link
bundling in general.
Netgear does not support Cisco's proprietary PAgP, never will. I
seriously doubt a Cisco 3560G does - Cisco has been phasing it out in
favor of IEEE 802.3ad Link Aggregation and Control Procotol (LACP) -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation.
Any half-way current managed switch worth it's salt will support LACP,
and I've never had any problem with cross-vendor compatibility -
HP<->Dell, HP<->Linux, HP<->Cisco, Cisco<->Dell, HP<->Foundry, etc.
So, aim for LACP and I don't think you'll have any problems.
Adam Greene wrote:
Need to bond some fiber lines ... Anyone have experience getting
Etherchannel to work between Cisco (3560G) and Netgear (GSM7224)?
--
Phil Brutsche
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
