<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic RE: Help with setting up LAG with LACP on Extreme and Procurve in Network Architecture &amp; Design</title>
    <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/help-with-setting-up-lag-with-lacp-on-extreme-and-procurve/m-p/14044#M1448</link>
    <description>I have read that having 'active' set shouldn't be a problem, and I now see that the HP 'static' LACP is something proprietary to HP, so thanks for pointing that out!  It looks like on the HP side, that by specifying the 'trunk' as dynamic, that is what sets it as LACP.  I guess if I was connecting (2) HP's, then choosing 'static' would be the way to go.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
It would be interesting to see if there is any performance gain/loss in going with a proprietary method, versus a standards method of essentially doing the same thing   It kind of makes you wonder why everyone doesn't always use the standards based method, as that is always going to be more compatible.</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2015 05:04:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Bruce_Garlock</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-11-06T05:04:00Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Help with setting up LAG with LACP on Extreme and Procurve</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/help-with-setting-up-lag-with-lacp-on-extreme-and-procurve/m-p/14042#M1446</link>
      <description>Hello,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
I'm wondering how I should setup a configuration between Extreme and Procurve.  On the HP, it looks like they have "static or dynamic", and "active or passive".  I'm assuming to create this LAG between the two switches that on the HP I would choose "static, and active"?  &lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;
Bruce&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2015 04:35:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/help-with-setting-up-lag-with-lacp-on-extreme-and-procurve/m-p/14042#M1446</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bruce_Garlock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-11-06T04:35:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Help with setting up LAG with LACP on Extreme and Procurve</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/help-with-setting-up-lag-with-lacp-on-extreme-and-procurve/m-p/14043#M1447</link>
      <description>If you're using LACP then you want "dynamic". I would also set it to "active". At least one switch needs to be active, but it doesn't hurt for both switches to be active. &lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2015 04:45:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/help-with-setting-up-lag-with-lacp-on-extreme-and-procurve/m-p/14043#M1447</guid>
      <dc:creator>Justin_Schmidt</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-11-06T04:45:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Help with setting up LAG with LACP on Extreme and Procurve</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/help-with-setting-up-lag-with-lacp-on-extreme-and-procurve/m-p/14044#M1448</link>
      <description>I have read that having 'active' set shouldn't be a problem, and I now see that the HP 'static' LACP is something proprietary to HP, so thanks for pointing that out!  It looks like on the HP side, that by specifying the 'trunk' as dynamic, that is what sets it as LACP.  I guess if I was connecting (2) HP's, then choosing 'static' would be the way to go.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
It would be interesting to see if there is any performance gain/loss in going with a proprietary method, versus a standards method of essentially doing the same thing   It kind of makes you wonder why everyone doesn't always use the standards based method, as that is always going to be more compatible.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2015 05:04:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/help-with-setting-up-lag-with-lacp-on-extreme-and-procurve/m-p/14044#M1448</guid>
      <dc:creator>Bruce_Garlock</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-11-06T05:04:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

