Hi @AppXprt, please stop ranting on a 7 years old thread.
I strongly suggest you to open a new dedicated thread and then explain what is your scenario, what are your switches, their topology, what is your exact purpose (Stack for management vs IRF, It looks it's "Stack for management" purposes) and involved software levels and so on.
The only thing I'm thinking of is that "aggregated stack ports" could be eventually built as a "group of stack ports" with the command (Example with 2 stack ports, 1/0/1 and 1/0/2):
stack stack-port 2 port gigabitethernet 1/0/1 gigabitethernet 1/0/2
but I'm pretty much dubious about that...the above grouping (1/0/1 and 1/0/2 grouped as "stack ports"), IMHO, can't be considered as a Link Aggregation (say LACP or Static, doesn't matter) and it's not supported if both links are setup between the very same switch pair...INDEED this sentence is quite clear about it:
"Link aggregation is not supported on stack ports. Every two stack member can have only one physical stack link between them."
References here (Page 185, sheet 193 of 202).
The example on the guide explain why it will not work.
If you don't trust what documentation states you can try to do is:
- Switch A configure two ports as stack ports with the command above.
- Switch B configure two ports as stack ports with the command above.
- Connect first stack port of Switch A with first stack port of Switch B (this will be the first physical link between them).
- Display stack port status (display stack members) to ensure both switches joined the stack for management correctly.
- Connect second stack port of Switch A with second stack port of Switch B.
- Display stack port status (display stack members) to understand if the above second physical connection (SW A 1/0/2 to SW B 1/0/2) is breaking the previous working stack configuration.
Probably CLI help doesn't reflect correctly what are possible scenarios.