Hi, On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 06:12:29PM +0000, Eric Van Tol wrote: > I???m trying to verify something here that is working, but also not working. > At some point, we built an LACP bundle to a customer device (2x1G ports) and > put it into an EoMPLS setup using xconnect to send it over to another site > where they have a 10G single circuit. While the LAG is ???up??? and passing > traffic, the ports continuously get removed from the bundle and added back in > and there???s obviously a small amount of packet loss that occurs when that > happens.
I've been there, and could not make it work (we tried with 2x 10G as
well as 2x 1G). I have the feeling that it's eating the/some LACP packets.
[..]
> If this is confirmed as unsupported, would I be correct in that we would have
> to separate out the untagged native VLAN into its own, non-xconnect EFP, so
> as to do proper ???l2protocol peer??? configuration? My only concern there is
> that the native VLAN needs to be transported along with all other VLANs to
> the other end of the xconnect so I am not sure right now how we do that, or
> if we even can.
There's an "encapsulation untagged" or something - it can be done :)
I have not tried to find out whether it's officially supported or
unsupported - ASR920 "what is supported and what not?" documentation is
not exactly satisfactory.
gert
--
"If was one thing all people took for granted, was conviction that if you
feed honest figures into a computer, honest figures come out. Never doubted
it myself till I met a computer with a sense of humor."
Robert A. Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
