Last I had heard, the IOS code can only understand 2 supervisors total. Meaning you have an active and a standby, and that's it. So you have 1 supervisor in each chassis total. There is no current concept of an active, and multiple 'hot' standby supervisors. That (among other things) made us decide not to do VSS, although having portchannels span multiple 6500's was an attractive feature.... And keep in mind that for VSS, you're looking at the Sup720-10G supervisors, and the WS-X6708 cards for the links between VSS pairs (sure, you can get away with just the links on the supervisors, but you have a huge single point of failure). Ken Matlock [email protected] Network Analyst Exempla Healthcare (303) 467-4671
________________________________ From: [email protected] on behalf of Jeff Kell Sent: Tue 7/28/2009 8:06 PM To: 'NSP List' Subject: [c-nsp] VSS question... Excuse the naive question, just starting to look at VSS and trying to tune to the concept... For those of you that have dived into VSS... are you still doing redundant supervisors per chassis? or just duplicating links on each chassis and crossing your fingers? I've done the 3750 stacks and perhaps locked my thinking into designing with a complete chassis failure being "tolerable" in the end design. Does this scale up to VSS, or just a matter of how many ports can you afford to drop? Jeff _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
