I just finished a design like that, and it worked just fine when I plugged
both NICs from a single server into separate switches.
Unless you're doing load-balancing, there's not much design to do for
something like this. It's all about eliminating the single-point-of-failure
(or moving it up to the CPU/server internal bus). The switches were
connected via trunks (ISL in this case). There's some DNS stuff that needs
to be done, but my sysadmins do all that stuff ;-)
and that was it
oh, except for the funky Microsoft thing that required me to add a static
ARP for the NATted inbound address, something about cluster servers and
such.
-e-
----- Original Message -----
From: Sam
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 2:57 PM
Subject: Rendundancy at the access layer??? [7:1971]
> Hey Group,
> I've been searching through Cisco's web site and I am not able to find
good
> information on redundancy at the access layer. There is plenty of info on
> using HSRP for high availability at the distribution and core layers.
What
> I'm looking for exactly is a design that will allow a high availability
> server to be connected to two separate switches (ex. 3524XL or 2948G-L3),
> possibly using Intel's server adapters that use Adaptive Fault Tolerance.
> The goal is to be fault tolerant in the event of a access layer switch
> failure. Is anybody doing anything similar to this? I need to come up
with
> a design and move onto product selection. Any information would be
> appreciated.
> Thanks
> Sam
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=2057&t=1971
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
