[j-nsp] LACP/LAG

[Mark Tinka]

On Thursday, October 17, 2013 11:07:25 PM Bill Blackford 
wrote:

> I recently had to form a bundle between an EX and a Palo
> Alto Firewall. The PAN does *not* support LACP.
> Personally, I'd rather use LACP whenever and where ever
> it's supported. It too would be interested in hearing
> others views on the need for it.

Agree.

One of the issues with not running LACP is that assume your 
Ethernet links are being driven by long distance 
transmission that doesn't hand down actual state of the 
remote side, e.g., local connection between router and 
transmission switch is up, but actual circuit to the remote 
site is down, without LACP enabled, the LAG will assume all 
member links are up, and will load traffic on all links. 
Traffic will then "disappear" over the link with a failed 
long distance circuit because in the eyes of the LAG, the 
member link is up (albeit locally, not end-to-end).

With LACP, the router would have known that due to non-
receipt of LACP keepalives from the remote end, that member 
link is not available for use, and thus, won't be added to 
the LAG.

So always recommend using LACP, if possible.

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/attachments/20131018/1932bc3c/attachment.sig>