Redundant Switches [7:54614]
I have a customer who has (1) 6509 backbone switches which is also acting as a root bridge. (7) 3524 are connect back to 6509 via fiber each as a seperate unit. At this point, if 6509 fails whole network will go down. I suggested to have an additional switch run in standby mode as a backup backbone switch. Customer doesn't want to spend around 40,000 to buy a 2nd 6509 switch. Can the backup switch be another Catalyst say 4000 or does it have to be the exact same model. I know the performance will be downgraded since 4000 series don't have the same switching backplane as opposed to 6509, but still it should take over as a root bridge incase 6509 goes down. In this configuration, the only thing they will have to do is to move their servers to the 4006 switch until the 6509 comes back online. All I need to make sure that the both 6509 and 4006 switch have the same configuration. Is there anything I am missing, please shed some lights guys. Teza 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=7i=54614t=54614 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Redundant Switches [7:54614]
interesting question - a thought or two in line Azhar Teza wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... I have a customer who has (1) 6509 backbone switches which is also acting as a root bridge. (7) 3524 are connect back to 6509 via fiber each as a seperate unit. At this point, if 6509 fails whole network will go down. I suggested to have an additional switch run in standby mode as a backup backbone switch. Customer doesn't want to spend around 40,000 to buy a 2nd 6509 switch. Can the backup switch be another Catalyst say 4000 or does it have to be the exact same model. I know the performance will be downgraded since 4000 series don't have the same switching backplane as opposed to 6509, but still it should take over as a root bridge incase 6509 goes down. In this configuration, the only thing they will have to do is to move their servers to the 4006 switch until the 6509 comes back online. All I need to make sure that the both 6509 and 4006 switch have the same configuration. Is there anything I am missing, please shed some lights guys. Teza CL: what kind of failure are you protecting against? I understand that everything homes back into the 6509. I'm just wondering about the connectivy requirements. CL: servers connect to what? CL: other essential services connect to what? CL: to protect against single points of failure, you will need to consider the following: 1) redundant 6509 2) dual homing of servers 3) dual homing of all other switches, to each of the two 6509's CL: if that is too pricy, another thought might be this: 1) segment all servers onto their own switch - a 3550-24 or 48 or 12 - whichever is appropirate. 2) get a 3550-12G, make it the root bridge, and dual home the server switch to both the 3550-12G and the 6509. Now, if the 6509 fails, other segments will have connectivity to the servers. If the 3550-12G fails, the 6509 allows server connectivity to those connected to it. 3) dual home all your closet switches to the 3550-12G and to the 6509. CL: under this scneario, you still have a single point of failure in the box that the servers are connected to. of course, the world is a single point of failure ;- CL: just a thought. maybe not the best idea, but certainly effective and inexpensive. 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=7i=54615t=54614 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Redundant Switches [7:54614]
Azhar Teza wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... I have a customer who has (1) 6509 backbone switches which is also acting as a root bridge. (7) 3524 are connect back to 6509 via fiber each as a seperate unit. At this point, if 6509 fails whole network will go down. I suggested to have an additional switch run in standby mode as a backup backbone switch. Customer doesn't want to spend around 40,000 to buy a 2nd 6509 switch. CL: only 40K for a backup 6509? I don't have my price book handy, but that seems really low ;- Can the backup switch be another Catalyst say 4000 or does it have to be the exact same model. I know the performance will be downgraded since 4000 series don't have the same switching backplane as opposed to 6509, but still it should take over as a root bridge incase 6509 goes down. In this configuration, the only thing they will have to do is to move their servers to the 4006 switch until the 6509 comes back online. All I need to make sure that the both 6509 and 4006 switch have the same configuration. Is there anything I am missing, please shed some lights guys. Teza 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=7i=54616t=54614 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Redundant Switches [7:54614]
The backup switch could be a lower-end switch. It doesn't have to be an exact replica of the other one. This is a classic case of Layer 8 (finances) being as important as the lower layers. It's quite common for the redundant network to be less pricey but also have poorer performance than the primary network. I do suggest testing performance and compatibility with the new switch being the root. Temporarily disable the 6509 and make sure there are no serious problems. Do the test during normal hours if possible so that you gather realistic data. You could warn your users that a test will be going on in case it fails. But you don't want to learn while a disaster is happening that your redundancy doesn't work. You wouldn't believe how many people have learned that the hard way. Test it beforehand. It sounds like the servers are currently connected to the 6509 and that you plan to manually move them if the 6509 dies. Could you afford to dual home the servers instead so that the failover to the new switch is automatic? Most network designers would insist that it must be automatic, but I've worked with quite a few cost-conscious customers who are willing to accept the longer downtime associated with a manual failover in order to save money. But automatic failover is definitely something to consider. Either way, make sure you test the server failover before disater happens and panic sets in. ;-) ___ Priscilla Oppenheimer www.troubleshootingnetworks.com www.priscilla.com Azhar Teza wrote: I have a customer who has (1) 6509 backbone switches which is also acting as a root bridge. (7) 3524 are connect back to 6509 via fiber each as a seperate unit. At this point, if 6509 fails whole network will go down. I suggested to have an additional switch run in standby mode as a backup backbone switch. Customer doesn't want to spend around 40,000 to buy a 2nd 6509 switch. Can the backup switch be another Catalyst say 4000 or does it have to be the exact same model. I know the performance will be downgraded since 4000 series don't have the same switching backplane as opposed to 6509, but still it should take over as a root bridge incase 6509 goes down. In this configuration, the only thing they will have to do is to move their servers to the 4006 switch until the 6509 comes back online. All I need to make sure that the both 6509 and 4006 switch have the same configuration. Is there anything I am missing, please shed some lights guys. Teza 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=7i=54643t=54614 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
