From: Guyler, Rik (rguyler@shp-dayton.org)
Date: Tue Jul 25 2006 - 15:39:46 ART
Well, in my case two separate 4500s so the stack isn't applicable in my
case. However, in light of the fact that Olayemi selected 3750s then I
would say a stack has to be considered a single switch since by stacking
them you basically create a single failure domain, at least in some ways.
It is possible to lose a switch and still maintain the stack but I wouldn't
want to trust it with critical production equipment if I had a choice. I
look at a 3750 stack as a "poor man's" chassis...one interface, one switch.
Rik
-----Original Message-----
From: James Ventre [mailto:messageboard@ventrefamily.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 2:30 PM
To: Guyler, Rik
Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
Subject: Re: FW: What's your View about these
> In our case, our servers are connected to two > separate switches using
a failover NIC team.
Yes, that's a good SOP, as long as those two separate switches aren't
stacked. It's semantic's .... is a stacked pair of switches considered
one switch or two?
James
Guyler, Rik wrote:
> If you connect the servers into a single device of any sort it becomes
> a single point of failure. In our case, our servers are connected to
> two separate switches using a failover NIC team. But, that's somewhat
> beyond the scope of network design as such and should be a standard
> adopted by the server team provided the network design supports such
initiatives.
>
> Rik
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Ventre [mailto:messageboard@ventrefamily.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 1:32 PM
> To: Guyler, Rik
> Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> Subject: Re: What's your View about these
>
> I'd consider your 3750 "stack" a single point of failure, if you're
> using the stacking feature. I recently came across a scenario where
> the stacking software between the 3750's wasn't functioning and no
> traffic passed - in or out.
>
> James
>
>
>
> Guyler, Rik wrote:
>> Our server farm connects into the network at the distribution layer,
>> where we typically have better equipment and higher bandwidth
>> backplanes. In our case, we use 4500 switches with Sup4s, which has
>> been an excellent combination supporting over 300+ servers,
>> mainframes,
> minis, AS400s, etc.
>> The 3750 series switches should also be a pretty good solution in
>> this situation but the backplane will be much less than a more robust
>> chassis switch. Be conservative on the number of switches in a
>> single stack since I seem to recall the backplane in a stack runs at
32Gb.
>>
>> I would not directly connect anything directly into the core except
>> for distribution and other core switches. Sometimes the demarcation
>> point is not clearly defined so if your core and distribution layers
>> are collapsed into a single device or layer then really, from an
>> architectural perspective the 3750 stacks would be considered access
>> layer but the reality is that they are still only a single hop away
>> form the core so don't get too wrapped up into the terminology.
>>
>> Rik
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _ Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Aug 01 2006 - 07:13:48 ART