cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
1239
Views
0
Helpful
6
Replies

Port-Channels vs. Sub-interfaces

caseth0102
Level 1
Level 1

Can anyone tell me if there's any reason why one would create a Port-Channel (containing only a single member) vs. a routable sub-interface? The device type is a 2948GL3.

6 Replies 6

kerek
Level 4
Level 4

Hi,

The port channel is stand for aggregating either L2 or L3 links and if you have only one link there is no need of aggregating at all.

Krisztian

Hi and thx for the reply. So in other words, the person who made this config, used a PO to handle the routing of the connected subnet, vs. just creating a subinterface of the physical port..correct? <

Are you sure that it is 2948 indeed, because as I know 2948 is L2 switch and does not have L3 capability?

Krisztian

Krisztian this unit is a 2948GL3 (routable) and is currently my core. I am trying to simply the new config with what makes sense. To me it appeared as if the PO was created simply to hold an ip, and to be used as the DFG instead of configuring a sub-int. I just want to make sure there is nothing i am missing moving forward. I plan to rip out all PO's with only a single member and configure the new core with routable interfaces (sub-ints) vs. carrying over a sloppy design.

Hi,

I guess this might be looking the future aspect, and modularity, i.e. if required multiple FE ports or GE ports could be added to the Port-Channel and it is more scalable (in terms of BW and fault-tolerance)

Now in terms of the Subinterface this can't be done in order to handle if the need for bandwidth grows high.

I hope that helps,

Please rate if it helps,

Kind Regards,

Wilson Samuel

Hi,

I have to agree with Wilson, that the PO does not have disadvantage and if you plan to increase the bandwidth the PO is a good choice. Anyway you have two way to create L3 interface. The first is to configure the switchport with ip address i.e. make it routable interface (obviously if you have trunk interface it is not possible) or create an SVI and assign the L2 port to that vlan. Summarized you don't need to get rid of the PO.

Krisztian

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community:

Innovations in Cisco Full Stack Observability - A new webinar from Cisco