It won't give you any increased bandwidth. Depending on how your network is laid out, it probably won't give you any failover either.
...Tim -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 1:49 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: HP Procurve - some questions That does help. However, it seems to mean that either a) Splitting server NICs between switches won't get me anything in the way of increased bandwidth or failover, or b) There is other configuration work that must be done to achieve those benefits. Do you happen to know which one is correct? Kurt On Dec 28, 2007 1:43 PM, Tim Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I can't comment on the 3400 series, we've had a bunch of 4000's > around here for years and recently upgraded most of our network to 5400 > series. > > With that caveat, all HP stacking does is let you manage the switches > using a single IP address. One of them is designated the commander and > the others are members. If one goes down (even the commander) the others > continue to function normally. When you connect to the stack using > telnet/ssh, you are prompted to select which switch to manage. When you > connect using http, you connect to the commander and have to select the > others to manage them. The configuration on each switch is independent - > you have to enable VLAN's on each one, define the same VLANs on each > one, etc. > > There is no special stacking connection, you just tie them together > using a LAN connection on each one. So, you don't get the full switch > backbone speed between stack members. Only the port speed of the to > ports connecting them. > > HTH > > > ...Tim > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 1:34 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: OT: HP Procurve - some questions > > We're putting together a plan for upgrading our network, and I have a > couple of questions regarding the Procurve 3400 series. > > They revolve around a decision I'll have to make about whether to get > two 24-port switches, or a single 48 port switch. > > I'd like to get two of the 24 port switches, and put them in a stacked > configuration, so that if one of them dies we won't lose everything, > with our servers splitting their NICs between the two 24 port > switches. > > They'll be the core switch(es) for our production network, and as such > will be the VLAN termination point, router, root bridge, etc., and I'm > wondering what the gotchas are for this kind of setup. > > Does anyone have experience with these, and how they behave if one of > the stacked switched does a face plant? > > I'm also interested in the speed penalty that stacking incurs, if any. > I haven't found hard figures on the HP site, but we're going to be > considering SANs later in the year, and I want to make sure that we > don't compromise their inherent 10Gig capability - we're thinking > iSCSI, or even FC over Ethernet, if that becomes useful by then. > > TIA, > > Kurt > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
