Switch setup with redundancy

This thread has been locked for further replies. You can start a new thread to share your ideas or ask questions.

Switch setup with redundancy

This thread has been locked for further replies. You can start a new thread to share your ideas or ask questions.
Switch setup with redundancy
Switch setup with redundancy
2019-01-28 13:36:14 - last edited 2019-01-28 13:37:30

I like to setup a network with following devices
* 2x TL2452
* 2x TL3424
* Lancom 1781EF+ with two free ports
* some Server with two or more network cards
* some Clients with one network card.

My ambition is a fail-safe network with no bottle-neck.
My idea is to connect one switch with the Lancom on one port, the switches with each other (each with one cable) and use rstp to calculate the tree. (see the picture)
At the Servers i would bound the network cards and patch each cable on a different switch.

Is this setup useful or is there a better way to achieve a fail-safe network with no bottle-neck?

 

Here a picture how i imagine the network

  0      
  0      
#1
Options
4 Reply
Re:Switch setup with redundancy
2019-01-29 03:25:03

maurice2019 wrote

I like to setup a network with following devices
* 2x TL2452
* 2x TL3424
* Lancom 1781EF+ with two free ports
* some Server with two or more network cards
* some Clients with one network card.

My ambition is a fail-safe network with no bottle-neck.
My idea is to connect one switch with the Lancom on one port, the switches with each other (each with one cable) and use rstp to calculate the tree. (see the picture)
At the Servers i would bound the network cards and patch each cable on a different switch.

Is this setup useful or is there a better way to achieve a fail-safe network with no bottle-neck?

 

 

Hi maurice2019

 

Just think that it maybe has issue for binding the network cards of the Servers and patching each cable on a different switch.

I think those switches do not support stack. When you connect the servers to independent switches, it may form the loop. Maybe you can connect the server to only one switch and use link aggregation.

  0  
  0  
#2
Options
Re:Re:Switch setup with redundancy
2019-01-30 12:08:42

Hi,

thanks for your reply.

You are right the Switch don't support stacking. How can I best distribute the server cables so as not to depend on just one switch? And is it useful to bound the ports, at which the servers are connected?
Two other questions:
- Is it RSTP the right choice or is there a better protocol.
- Is it useful to connect the switches with multiple cabels?

 

  0  
  0  
#3
Options
Re:Re:Re:Switch setup with redundancy
2019-01-31 01:09:25

maurice2019 wrote

Hi,

thanks for your reply.

You are right the Switch don't support stacking. How can I best distribute the server cables so as not to depend on just one switch? And is it useful to bound the ports, at which the servers are connected?
Two other questions:
- Is it RSTP the right choice or is there a better protocol.
- Is it useful to connect the switches with multiple cabels?

 

Hi 

 

When we use link aggregation, the server sill depends on one switch. I think there is not way unless your switches support stack. Maybe you can deploy a backup server that connected to other switches.

 

RSTP is a good choice for redundancy. 

You can connect the switches with multiple cabels through link aggregation. But please note that, after you configured the link aggregation, you need to re-configure the layer2 function like RSTP, VLAN, IGMP snooping and so on. And you should configure these function for LAGS(link aggregaion groups).

 

 

  0  
  0  
#4
Options
Re:Re:Re:Re:Switch setup with redundancy
2019-02-01 07:12:02

Hi Andone,

 

thank you very much for your great hints and help.

  0  
  0  
#5
Options