Etherchannel from 2811 router to 2950 switch

Unanswered Question
Jul 16th, 2008

I am trying to configure 4 ports from 2811 etherswitch for etherchannel. It should be a trunk port for dot1q encapsulation. The router will perform intervlan routing with SVI.

This is connecting to 2950 switch. Can't seem to find the example configuration anywhere.

Is this called L2 etherchannel?

Are the commands for the etherswitch etherchannel similar to 2950?

Using Port group?

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Joseph W. Doherty Thu, 07/17/2008 - 03:40

Since your asking about Etherchannels, agree with Romek, 2811 not a suitable LAN router since it can't substain even 100 Mbps of throughput. Also, Romek's suggestion of the 3560 is good, specifically you might want to look at the Catalyst 3560-8PC.

PS:

If you do aquire a L3 switch, the 2811 would remain a better choice for most WAN links. I.e. a L3 switch and router can be used together.

laichenkang Thu, 07/17/2008 - 04:21

Wouldn't the CEF in the 2811 help in this case?

Anyway, is the 3560 the cheapest L3 switch available?

tdrais Thu, 07/17/2008 - 05:06

The numbers for a 2811 are much below 100m even with cef turned on. I think a chart I saw said something like only 2m if it was processor switched and 30m with cef

If you want a current model a 3560 is your cheapest model. You might find a old 3550 but you would need to use fiber for your uplink if you wanted gig. The 3560-8 has a slot that you can put a copper or fiber module in for your gig uplink. Although you could use your 4x100 etherchannel plan a gig port is easier.

You really never want to use a true router to route between your vlans in a campus. A router has more features that are not needed in a lan and have been removed in layer 3 switches. This allows a layer 3 switch to use hardware to do functions a router does in software.

laichenkang Thu, 07/17/2008 - 05:11

This is surprising that an expensive router is no match for a cheap linux box in terms of routing.

I guess wrong tool for the job.

tdrais Thu, 07/17/2008 - 06:54

yup lots of things will beat a router when you only look at lan to lan traffic. What you are paying for is the ability to insert things like a DS3 card or fancy cards like circuit emulation.

I am just waiting until cisco starts selling a layer 3 box under the linksys name. Their layer 2 SRW switches are pretty close to 2960 switches and even run CLI if you hack a little.

Joseph W. Doherty Thu, 07/17/2008 - 12:04

Perhaps in terms of pps per dollar, however doubt the cheap Linux box can match all the features of the router. Compared to the L3 switch, the cheap Linux box might lose the race on both features and pps. Then for both the router and L3 switch, there's the issue of insuring they function correctly both normally and against security attacks. Of course with Linux you can rewrite (yourself) parts of the OS and device drivers as necessary. ;)

Actions

This Discussion