<?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: MLAG is good or bad in this topology diagram? in Network Architecture &amp; Design</title>
    <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13246#M650</link>
    <description>Sorry. I didn't see the x620 (on mobile phone). You are right.</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:59:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>mischoe</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-02-25T02:59:00Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>MLAG is good or bad in this topology diagram?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13243#M647</link>
      <description>We have Core A and Core B Cisco switch's both are working in active-active and deployed in Building A, and in our environment, all access switch's are X440-G2 have edge license? Now I want to connect these core switches to Building B, so I now am creating MLAG over X440-G2 on Building B.&lt;BR /&gt;
so May I ask is it a good way to designing???&lt;P class="fancybox-image"&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper" image-alt="9450eca3a4744faf93ce739c2193ef05_RackMultipart20180224-6289-kmi4gl-Mlag_inline.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/5104i8BE822AC4B314432/image-size/large?v=v2&amp;amp;px=999" role="button" title="9450eca3a4744faf93ce739c2193ef05_RackMultipart20180224-6289-kmi4gl-Mlag_inline.jpg" alt="9450eca3a4744faf93ce739c2193ef05_RackMultipart20180224-6289-kmi4gl-Mlag_inline.jpg" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:32:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13243#M647</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alok_Shukla</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-25T02:32:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: MLAG is good or bad in this topology diagram?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13244#M648</link>
      <description>Hi Alok. &lt;BR /&gt;
 Is this related to your other question VSS/MLAG? &lt;BR /&gt;
 I never used X440-G2 as MLAG. &lt;BR /&gt;
 In my opinion, the X440 is an acces Switch only and not a Distribution switch. &lt;BR /&gt;
 However, woth an advanced edge license it should work. &lt;BR /&gt;
 (See license requirements and x440 limitaions). We use a X670-G as MLAG peer and X440 as access. Perfect solution. &lt;BR /&gt;
 Regards Micha</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:40:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13244#M648</guid>
      <dc:creator>mischoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-25T02:40:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: MLAG is good or bad in this topology diagram?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13245#M649</link>
      <description>The diagram doesn't show any x440G2 in MLAG, but x620. They are interconnected via "40G links", which is not possible on x620. This diagram doesn't seem very accurate.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:59:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13245#M649</guid>
      <dc:creator>Stephane_Grosj1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-25T02:59:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: MLAG is good or bad in this topology diagram?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13246#M650</link>
      <description>Sorry. I didn't see the x620 (on mobile phone). You are right.</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:59:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13246#M650</guid>
      <dc:creator>mischoe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-25T02:59:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: MLAG is good or bad in this topology diagram?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13247#M651</link>
      <description>Alok,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
If your old X450 switches are already working in MLAG created using X620 peers, then of course you can use X440-G2 in MLAG config as well. Note that X440-G2 is here a downstream device in MLAG desing; all you have to do is setting up a LACP/sharing on X440-G2 links to X620 MLAG peers.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
I've never used X620 as peers in MLAG configuration; as Micha said, X670-G2 would be the best fit.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
REGARDS&lt;BR /&gt;
Robert</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Feb 2018 03:11:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13247#M651</guid>
      <dc:creator>Robert_Zdzieblo</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-25T03:11:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: MLAG is good or bad in this topology diagram?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13248#M652</link>
      <description>I want to create X440-G2 Peers and all attached access switches will also X440-G2, Is X400-G2 is supporting for creating MLAG peer, and I don't want to create VRRP on MLAG peer I just want to transfer L2 traffic to Core Switches.</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Feb 2018 13:13:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13248#M652</guid>
      <dc:creator>Alok_Shukla</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-25T13:13:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: MLAG is good or bad in this topology diagram?</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13249#M653</link>
      <description>yes, you can do MLAG with x440G2.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 Feb 2018 22:13:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/mlag-is-good-or-bad-in-this-topology-diagram/m-p/13249#M653</guid>
      <dc:creator>Stephane_Grosj1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-02-25T22:13:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

