[j-nsp] Re: ae0 (802.3ad/LACP) against GSR?

[Niels Bakker]

* saku+juniper-nsp at ytti.fi (Saku Ytti) [Thu 27 Jan 2005, 19:14 CET]:
> On (2005-01-27 16:21 +0200), Saku Ytti wrote:
>> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos70/swconfig70-interfaces/html/interfaces-ethernet-config54.html#1014780
>> 
>>  This suggests that VLAN is required, is this true, if so why? Also as
>> GSR does not support any signalling (not lacp or pagp) will GSR<->juniper
>> aggregated ethernet work at all? And if not, would list happen to know
>> if GSR Phase3 port-channel will support LACP?

My experience here is mostly with switches inbetween, but plain ae0 on
JunOS / port-channel on IOS with no LACP, PAgP, 802.3ad frills works.
Haven't tried between the two.

The VLAN tag may be a remnant from JunOS 5.x; that required vlan-tagging
on ae interfaces.  This limitation was removed in 6.0.  The GSR
definitely doesn't require it, I see no reason to q-tag connections
unless necessitated by network layout design.


> Juniper has just 'gigether-options { 802.3ad ae0; }' on two physical
> interfaces (IQ and !IQ). With 'aggregated-devices { ethernet { device-count
> 1; }'.

Looks good, although I daren't say anything about IQ vs. non-IQ.


> Cisco has only 'channel-group 1 on' in physical interfaces.

should also be enough - however...

> Cisco is running 12.0(27)S4, Juniper is running 7.0R2.

that IOS may blow for link aggregation.  Perhaps try one of these:

12.0(25)S4
12.0(28)S1
12.0(30)S

I have no personal knowledge how well lb-ph3 images work but they're
supposedly the bee's knees.

Best to follow-up to cisco-nsp :)


	-- Niels.

--