When you combine the switches via gigastack, you are usually doing it because you can't afford a chassis based switch in the closet (or don't need one). If you do gigastack the switches, they are treated as separate hops in spanning tree. I guess it's cheaper to run small gigastack cables then it is to run the switches via fiber back to a core/disro 6500 both on the wiring and the ports on the core/distro switch. Those gbic blades cost more than the chassis itself.
""Azhar Teza"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > If I take 4 Catalyst 3500 Series Switches and configure in a GigabitStack > Module then I would assume that I am creating a one virtual switch and all > the backplanes of the switches should combine the total speed of switching > backplane. Am I correct or it is a samething you are connecting two swiches > through crossover and dividing the bandwidth. If my assumptions are > correct then the STP run only on those ports which will be uplink to (2) > 6509 layer 3 switches. One in forwarding mode and the other one in blocking > mode. The GigabitStack ports between the four switches should not be in > either a forwarding or blocking port since they are just being used creat a > big one virtual switch from the 4 seperate physical switches. If my > assumptions are incorrect then what is the benefit of using stacking modules > and diving the bandwidth instead of combining them. I would then rather > connect each 3500 directly to 6509 switch. Thanks > > ------------------------------------------------ > Changed your e-mail? Keep your contacts! Use this free e-mail change of > address service from Return Path. Register now! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=54387&t=54360 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
