From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 29 16:17:01 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7408106566B for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:17:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ddesimone@verio.net) Received: from relay1-bcrtfl2.verio.net (relay1-bcrtfl2.verio.net [131.103.218.142]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81FB08FC17 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:17:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from iad-wprd-xchw01.corp.verio.net (iad-wprd-xchw01.corp.verio.net [198.87.7.164]) by relay1-bcrtfl2.verio.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0665B038228 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 11:49:49 -0400 (EDT) thread-index: Ac2F/eu7fA1En7AfTReaztTxYYULtw== Received: from hometx-733b1p1.corp.verio.net ([10.144.2.53]) by iad-wprd-xchw01.corp.verio.net over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 29 Aug 2012 11:49:48 -0400 Received: by hometx-733b1p1.corp.verio.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:49:47 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:49:47 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "David DeSimone" To: Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Importance: normal Priority: normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4913 Message-ID: <20120829154946.GR5500@verio.net> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <503DEDF1.2020406@omnilan.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Aug 2012 15:49:48.0099 (UTC) FILETIME=[EB171130:01CD85FD] Subject: Re: Problem with link aggregation + sshd X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:17:01 -0000 Pete French wrote: > > Actually I went and looked out my old emails - Cisco 3750 switches > worked as a pair with LACP, Cisco 3560 ones didn't. Whatever the > difference is between those two, thats the difference between working > and not working :) Is that real stacking vs virtual stacking by any > chance ? The Cisco 3750 and 3560 are nearly identical; the very difference between them is that the 3750 is stackable, and the 3560 is not. So you can expect to set up working LACP bundles across stack members on the 3750, but you cannot set up working LACP bundles across two 3560 switches. -- David DeSimone == Network Admin == fox@verio.net "I don't like spinach, and I'm glad I don't, because if I liked it I'd eat it, and I just hate it." -- Clarence Darrow This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, distribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. Verio Inc. makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you.