nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Etherchannel Questions

rewind

Can anybody give input as to the technical fallacy with this design:

Switch A has four ports. Two ports connect to Switch B and two connect to switch C. Switch A has all four of these ports in the same Etherchannel. The etherchannel has an IP address on Switch A only. (I believe this would be a layer 3 etherchannel.)

I think this is wrong because:

1) You can have members of the same port channel going to two different switches and
2) You can't put an IP on only one side of the port channel.

What do you guys think?

Find more posts tagged with

SAVE $250 on Your CISCO Boot Camp — Use Code "EXAM26"

Exclusively for TechExams members for Infosec Boot Camps starting before April 30, 2026

View CISCO Boot Camps

Comments

cisco_trooper

silentbobby wrote:

Can anybody give input as to the technical fallacy with this design:

Switch A has four ports. Two ports connect to Switch B and two connect to switch C. Switch A has all four of these ports in the same Etherchannel. The etherchannel has an IP address on Switch A only. (I believe this would be a layer 3 etherchannel.)

I think this is wrong because:

1) You can have members of the same port channel going to two different switches and
2) You can't put an IP on only one side of the port channel.

What do you guys think?

The etherchannel on switch A cannot be split between two different switches. You will have to create two separate etherchannels on Switch A.