Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

Port-Channels vs. Sub-interfaces

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
Silver

Re: Port-Channels vs. Sub-interfaces

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

New Member

Re: Port-Channels vs. Sub-interfaces

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? <

Silver

Re: Port-Channels vs. Sub-interfaces

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

Krisztian

New Member

Re: Port-Channels vs. Sub-interfaces

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.

Re: Port-Channels vs. Sub-interfaces

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

Silver

Re: Port-Channels vs. Sub-interfaces

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

264
Views
0
Helpful
6
Replies