Re: keep state "issue" / possible feature for the future?

This is a discussion on Re: keep state "issue" / possible feature for the future? within the IPFilter forums, part of the System Security and Security Related category; " From: "Stuart Remphrey" <stuart.remphrey@rmit.edu.au> " " " " In (almost) all ...


Go Back   Usenet Forums > System Security and Security Related > IPFilter

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-02-2007
Sandwich Maker
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: keep state "issue" / possible feature for the future?

" From: "Stuart Remphrey" <stuart.remphrey@rmit.edu.au>
"
"
"
" In (almost) all cases we now use IPMP with interfaces
" marked as standby so only one is active at a time,
" although it's not ideal. Trunking (aka Etherchannel)
" might be another way around it - this is at MAC layer,
" all interfaces in group have same MAC/ipaddr's,
" but it has other restrictions (eg. can't group ether+atm,
" which you can do with IPMP if you really want to).

but you should be able to ipmp a trunked group, since logically the
trunk is a single if.
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Andrew Hay the genius nature
internet rambler is to see what all have seen
adh@an.bradford.ma.us and think what none thought
Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0