[c-nsp] port channel numbering schemes

[Keegan Holley]

2012/3/7 Jared Mauch <jared at puck.nether.net>

>
> On Mar 7, 2012, at 9:23 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> > On 07/03/2012 14:16, chris stand wrote:
> >> thoughts/ideas/concerns
> >
> > This works fine until you try it on smaller boxes and you find out that
> > they only support port-channel names up to 48 or whatever.  Then you
> have a
> > moment of extreme facepalm and go back to Po1, Po2 and Po3.
>
> I've found 'show interface description' and a well thought out (and
> machine parseable) standard for naming works well.
>
> This way you can just find what you want quickly.  CDP and LLDP can also
> assist you in documenting ports as well, though some people don't like the
> information leakage.
>
>
+1 interface descriptions are the way to go here.  I try to stay away from
clever numbering.  I find that it's hard for people other than the person
that thought of the scheme to remember it.  Not only that what happens to
your numbering scheme if you need to move vlan1300 or add it to more than
one port channel.   Numbers don't convey enough information to be used as
an inventory system.