[c-nsp] Cisco Fast Ether Channel vs. IEEE 802.3ad ?

[Ed Ravin]

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 11:18:36AM -0500, Robert D. Holtz wrote:
> Cisco supports LACP mode for port channels between switches and to servers.
> 
> 
> There's a ton of confusing nomenclature about ISL/Ether channel/port channel
> etc.  
> 
> If you stick to LACP all "should" work between vendors.

But as I mentioned in the original note, I'm trunking between a 7513 and
a non-Cisco switch.  LACP doesn't seem to be supported on the 7500 in 12.0S.
On the other hand, "ISL VLAN" is supported on both.  But ISL also
seems to be Cisco-proprietary.

It sounds like I will have to keep the old ProCurve around (good thing
they've got lifetime warranties) if I want to do link aggregation?  Or
tell my boss he needs to cough up extra $$$ and buy a Cisco switch?

	-- Ed


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ed Ravin
> Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 11:09 AM
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco Fast EtherChannel vs. IEEE 802.3ad ?
> 
> We're using a Cisco Fast EtherChannel trunk between our 7513 and
> an elderly HP ProCurve.  The ProCurve has a config setting for trunks
> where it explicitly says "FEC mode". The Cisco is set up with a
> "Port-Channel" interface and all is well.
> 
> But I'm shopping for a new switch to replace the ProCurve, and the newer
> ProCurve switches seem to all support IEEE 802.3ad / LACP, with no mention
> of EtherChannel.  Googling around a bit, it seems that Cisco Fast
> EtherChannel
> might be a subset of IEEE 802.3ad or vice versa, but it's not clear, since
> I also see mention that Cisco Fast EtherChannel is proprietary and had to
> be specially licensed to HP.
> 
> Can anyone shed some light on the subject?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	-- Ed
> _______________________________________________