-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 654
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Adding config container for LACP member interface with port-priority #940
Comments
The configuration for aggregation has generally been under |
Another way to do it is set port-priority under I agree it's somewhat arbitrary where to place this configuration. |
+1 - is best to create a uint16 leaf under the grouping
|
Thanks everyone for your responses! It looks like the attributes under So then my changes would look like:
|
Actually yes, you are correct on the first part - the
Now a container to bucketize aggregation related parameters is probably worth exploring under For the latter on LACP member priority placement for state, that LGTM |
Agreed on using the ethernet subtree and given there are >=2 values, then adding a container is a reasonable option.
I'll also second Ebben's recommendation to use |
Deprecate aggregate-id and move it to dedicated ethernet container for for interface's link aggregation parameters. Add port-priority to this container. Add actor and partner port priority to LACP member state.
Deprecate aggregate-id and move it to dedicated ethernet container for for interface's link aggregation parameters. Add port-priority to this container. Add actor and partner port priority to LACP member state.
Deprecate aggregate-id and move it to dedicated ethernet container for for interface's link aggregation parameters. Add port-priority to this container. Add actor and partner port priority to LACP member state.
I believe this was fixed in #943 |
Hi, I don’t see a way to configure a member interface’s priority in a LAG (or configure anything else for an LACP member interface, as there is no config container under
/lacp/interfaces/interface[name]/members/member[interface]
). I’m wondering if it would be ok to add a config container for member interfaces with port-priority, as well as the port-priority and partner-port-priority leaves under member state:Vendor examples for the configuration:
Arista, section "Configuring Port Priority":
https://www.arista.com/en/um-eos/eos-port-channels-and-lacp
Cisco, section "Configuring the LACP System ID and Port Priority":
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios/12_2sb/feature/guide/gigeth.html
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: