Hi Chris, Hi all, Q-in-Q / L2Tunnel and 802.1ad with LACP works with Cisco switches without any problem. On ME switch and I tested it with small low-cost 3560G, it works too.
Here's an example: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/metro/me3400e/software/release/12.2_55_se/configuration/guide/swtunnel.html#wp1066465 Is it what you are looking for? Cheers, Jerome Jerome Tissieres ___________________________________ Head of Network Engineering & Operations Ticinocom SA Via Stazione 5 CH-6600 Locarno Phone +41 91 220 00 00 Fax +41 91 220 00 10 www.ticino.com ___________________________________ 2013/6/16 chris burri <[email protected]> > Unfortunately, QinQ (which is called "vman" in the Extreme Networks world) > does not work with LACP. Corroborating to the problem is the fact that the > LAG ports originate on the same switch that provides the transport vmans. > Since QinQ transports share src/dst MAC address-space with the connected > "customer" VLANs, the "direct" approach does not even work for non-LACP > LAGs. > > I successfully employed encapsulation of the LACP LAG legs with a pair of > EdgeMAX Lite routers, configured for L2 GRE Bridging. I was then able to > pipe the encapsulated LAG legs back into the Summit X460 Switch where they > originally came from, and transport them over the vmans. Unfortunately, the > performance achieved by this solution (~350mbps on a single leg) is far > from sufficient. > > Two kind members of the NANOG mailing list pointed me to ethernet > demarcation devices (E-Line being of interest here) from accedian and > ciena, which might just do the trick at GigE wire speed: > > http://www.accedian.com/en/products/ethernid-family.html > http://www.ciena.com/products/3902/ > > Silvan also pointed out that Mikrotik's EoIP might provide adequate > performance when provided by a pair of CCR1036 36 core CPU routers. > However, it looks as if the accedian/ciena devices would offer a much more > cost-effective approach. > > > Mit freundlichen Grüssen > Chris Burri > > > --- > > -= Amat Victoria Curam =- > > > > Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:19:39 +0200 > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [swinog] Transparent 1Gig Ethernet over IP/Ethernet? > > > > > > > > I need to transparently (especially LACP > > > frames) transport a gigabit ethernet link with at least 1500 MTU over > > > either IP or Ethernet. Jumbo frames are enabled on > > > the L2 transport backbone. While I need "full" (some encap overhead > > > will be acceptable) GigE wire speed, encryption is unnecessary. > > > > Since you don't need encryption, aren't these more or less the same > > requirements as to transport dot1q tags within an existing vlan, that > > is, q-in-q? The foundry/brocade approach would be to override the frame > > tag on the entry and exit ports and declare those ports as access-ports > > (untagged to transport-vlan XYZ), thus transporting anything that comes > > in there via vlan XYZ to the destination. Or is LACP more low-level and > > can't be tricked to be relayed by playing with frame types? > > > > Cheers, > > Markus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > swinog mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog > > > _______________________________________________ > swinog mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog > >
_______________________________________________ swinog mailing list [email protected] http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
