From: Chuck Church (cchurch@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Jul 25 2002 - 13:58:49 GMT-3
Thanks Frank, all. I'm surprised they didn't mention that in the other
redundancy docs I found. Guess I'll keep it as originally designed.
Thanks again,
Chuck Church
CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
Sr. Network Engineer
Magnacom Technologies
140 N. Rt. 303
Valley Cottage, NY 10989
845-267-4000
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Frank Jimenez
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 11:37 PM
To: 'Larry Roberts'; Chuck Church; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: MSFC2 redundancy
I'm going to have to back down from my previous statement - That is NOT
a supported configuration.
>From
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat6000/relnotes/78_
11235.htm
Redundant Supervisor Engine Configurations
In systems with redundant supervisor engines, both supervisor engines
must be identical and have the same daughter card configurations. For
example:
Slot 1-Supervisor Engine 2, PFC2, MSFC2
Slot 2-Supervisor Engine 2, PFC2, MSFC2
Slot 1-Supervisor Engine 2, PFC2
Slot 2-Supervisor Engine 2, PFC2
Slot 1-Supervisor Engine 1, PFC, MSFC2
Slot 2-Supervisor Engine 1, PFC, MSFC2
Slot 1-Supervisor Engine 1, PFC, MSFC1
Slot 2-Supervisor Engine 1, PFC, MSFC1
Slot 1-Supervisor Engine 1, PFC
Slot 2-Supervisor Engine 1, PFC
Slot 1-Supervisor Engine 1
Slot 2-Supervisor Engine 1
These configuration requirements apply to all Catalyst 6000 family
switches. We do not support configurations that are not identical.
------
The link I provided earlier didn't have a slot 2 module (or had an
identical slot 2 module) , and wasn't providing Supervisor redundancy.
Sorry for the confusion.
Frank Jimenez, CCIE #5738
franjime@cisco.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Larry Roberts
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 9:53 PM
To: Chuck Church; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: MSFC2 redundancy
Chuck,
This will work fine. Here's how I would set it up:
One MSFC in each switch.
Two HSRP groups.
One MSFC is primary for one group and standby for the other. Vice versa
for the other group.
Even VLANs use group 1 as their default gateway.
Odd VLANs use group 2.
This allows you to load balance traffic across the switches and also
have redundancy in case of failure.
Sincerely,
Larry Roberts
CCIE #7886 (R&S / Security)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Church" <cchurch@MAGNACOM.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 6:01 PM
Subject: OT: MSFC2 redundancy
> Anyone,
>
> Sorry for the OT, but couldn't find a definitive answer on CCO. I've
> got a client who purchased two 6509 switches, one with redundant
sup2's
> and the other with redundant sup2's with MSFC2's. This was the config
> recommended by our Cisco salesperson. Redundant MSFC2's in each
> switch
were
> too pricey. Anyway, my question is can I put a sup2/MSFC2 in each
switch's
> slot one, with the non-MSFC2 in each slot 2? Cisco was intending both
> MSFC2's in the same switch, but if I lose that switch totally, I've
> lost
all
> inter-VLAN routing. The two switches will be tied together with
> multiple
> (channeled) gig trunks. I was just going to go ahead and try it, but
not
at
> the risk of damaging a supervisor. Does anyone know if this is
> supported?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Chuck Church
> CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
> Sr. Network Engineer
> Magnacom Technologies
> 140 N. Rt. 303
> Valley Cottage, NY 10989
> 845-267-4000
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:43 GMT-3