cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
5431
Views
15
Helpful
11
Replies

Etherchannel with Cisco wireless Bridges

otubushin
Level 1
Level 1

Hello,

I am trying to create a network in which there are four bridges communicating wirelessly in point to point design(Two bridges on each end of the network which are the connected to Catalyst 3650 switches). I have achieved this design but when I combine the links using etherchannel on the switches one of the link is active and the other inactive. the other link becomes active only when the active links goes down due to STP. Is there a way I can make both links to transmit and receive in a bonded fashion without one of the links being inactive to achieve aggregated throughput. Attached is an example of the network looks like.

I would be grateful if any assistance is given to me in this area.

thanks.

3 Accepted Solutions

Accepted Solutions

Scott Fella
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

I have used STP to manage what vlans are priority to each bridge link.  Never tried creating an etherchannel... Here is a link if you haven't seen it.

http://www-europe.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/wireless/ps5279/products_tech_note09186a0080736199.shtml#t9

What maodel bridges are you using?

-Scott
*** Please rate helpful posts ***

View solution in original post

dancampb
Level 7
Level 7

Technically you can't do etherchanneling with the wireless bridges.  The way to accomplish multiple paths is to use routing.  Basically put each bridge on a different subnet/VLAN and either use static routes or a dynamic routing protocol so that there are equal cost routes over each bridges link.  This way the routing protocol will handle the load balancing.

View solution in original post

11 Replies 11

Scott Fella
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

I have used STP to manage what vlans are priority to each bridge link.  Never tried creating an etherchannel... Here is a link if you haven't seen it.

http://www-europe.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/wireless/ps5279/products_tech_note09186a0080736199.shtml#t9

What maodel bridges are you using?

-Scott
*** Please rate helpful posts ***

Thanks scott is there anyway I can use a switch to accomplish this or to combine the links to achieve aggregated throughput.

I am using cisco aironet 1300 wireless bridges.

What you can do since you have switches on each end is set the stp priority to certain vlans higher on one bridge switchport and the other vlans higher on the other bridge switchport.... this way you can at least have traffic using both and if one bridge fails, then traffic will move to the other wireless bridge.  One thing is... don't know what bridge you are using is that some bridges can take down the ethernet port so that if the wireless link goes down, the infrastructure knows of it.  Or else, traffic will not pass since the switch will still try to take the path of the downed wireless link.

-Scott
*** Please rate helpful posts ***

Your answer fits the description of the problem I am facing. If I remove the ethernet cable connecting on of the wireless bridges, data trasfer stops and does not continue with the inactive link unless I start the transfer again.I am using cisco aironet 1300 wireless bridges. The main point of my design is to aggregate links and increase throughput with the information given I will try and see what I can get.

Like Dan mentioned, there is no way you can bond the ports together and make it act like an etherchannel.  You either have a primary and backup solution or your configure spanning tree to determine what vlans it should pass to what switch port.  This way at least you are using both links and not congesting one link with traffic.

Here is an example"

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3560/software/release/12.2_25_see/configuration/guide/swstp.html#wp1020470

-Scott
*** Please rate helpful posts ***

So I'm curious...Why couldn't you setup LACP on the 3650 ports that are connected to the 1300? LACPDU should detect if the RF is down but the Ethernet is up, and thus use both links and protect the traffic if the RF is not passing traffic. STP not an issue with LACP or PAGP.

I have tried it with layer 3 etherchannel and used the eigrp routing protocol to route between the different networks and it works now but I am going to try it with a bigger file to see if it will perform better.

dancampb
Level 7
Level 7

Technically you can't do etherchanneling with the wireless bridges.  The way to accomplish multiple paths is to use routing.  Basically put each bridge on a different subnet/VLAN and either use static routes or a dynamic routing protocol so that there are equal cost routes over each bridges link.  This way the routing protocol will handle the load balancing.

Thanks Dan, I will try and use that idea but is there anyway I can get some info that will help in designing the network to behave in that manner. Another things is since a layer 3 switch can perform routing can I just use one switch on each end just as described.

Thanks Dan  I have tried it with layer 3 etherchannel and used the eigrp routing protocol to route between the different networks and it works now, I noticed both links were utilized but I am going to try it with a bigger file to see if it will perform better. firstly I used layer 2 bridges then I converted it to wireless links and tested it. if you want a snapshot of the design I can send it to you.

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: