Talk:EtherChannel

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

IP/MAC-addresses....

Quote:

When an EtherChannel is configured all adapters that are part of the channel share the same Layer 2 (MAC) address and Layer 3 (IP) Address. This makes the EtherChannel transparent to network applications and users because they only see the one logical connection; they have no knowledge of the individual links.

I agree that EtherChannel doesn’t have anything to do with L3/IP, but what about MAC-addresses? MAC-addresses are only used if you have to communicate with the network. If you only transport traffic then you don't use a MAC-address on layer 2. EtherChannel is as far as I know only used as transport and therefore doesn’t have anything to do with MAC-addresses, and other vendor specific implementation stuff. With other words, how Broadcom/Microsoft communicates on Ethernet doesn’t concern EtherChannel or what?

/Klaus

Quote:

A former limitation of EtherChannel was that all the physical ports in the aggregation group must reside on the same switch. The SMLT protocol removes this limitation by allowing the physical ports to be split between two switches. Cisco's Virtual Switching System allows the creation of a Multichassis Etherchannel (MEC) allowing ports to be aggregated towards different physical chassis that conform a single "virtual switch" entity.

AFAIK:

EtherChannel is only on Cisco switches.
SMLT is only on Nortel switches.
EtherChannel still requires to aggregate into an unique switch.

Quote:

These load-sharing algorithms vary between platforms due to the fact that decisions are based on source or destination MAC addresses, IP addresses or TCP and UDP port numbers. The following table illustrates the ratios at which EtherChannel balances the load across the ports:

The hash function gives a number between 0 and 7, and the real link used depends on figures on table.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.51.20.123 (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Auto-configuration

Removed the table in EtherChannel vs. 802.3ad section because it is wrong to say that Little, if any, configuration of switch required to form aggregation. The need for configuration depends on the use of link aggregation protocols such as LACP or PAGP. Moreover, both LACP and PAGP support a mode that permanently enables the channel (aggregated port). --User26954344524345 (talk) 21:28, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]