Re: LAN Standards Document

Yeah if you do not need to span vlans across the campus and you have a solid design it is the way to go.

Regards,

Joe Astorino - CCIE #24347 R&S
Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
Cell: +1.586.212.6107
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
Mailto: jastorino_at_ipexpert.com

-----Original Message-----
From: "Joseph L. Brunner" <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 23:29:53
To: Joe Astorino<jastorino_at_ipexpert.com>
Cc: Jason Kline<jkline_at_ondemandnetwork.net>; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com<ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
Subject: RE: LAN Standards Document

Very good point Joe!

Last week I watched a guy who thought

Vlan 99

Int vlan 99
Ip address 10.1.99.1 255.255.255.0

Int g1/0/1
Switchport
Switchport access vlan 99

Was the same thing as

Int g1/0/1
No switchport
Ip address 10.1.99.1 255.255.255.0

Guess what?

He ran into an issue where his rootguard activated and took his port down up against my datacenter switch. He was in a root inconsistent move to blocking all afternoon and didn't get it back until he did
Spanning-tree bpdufilter enable

So as you see the STP stuff is hard on the design if you just want routed island vlans :)

From: Joe Astorino [mailto:jastorino_at_ipexpert.com]
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 4:49 PM
To: Joseph L. Brunner
Cc: Jason Kline; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: LAN Standards Document

Among a billion other things -- off the top of my head I would say avoid L2 links where possible. If you can get the big cheese to spring for all L3 switches in even the access layer (3750 is a great choice) do it. Then run either EIGRP or OSPF from the access-layer up redundantly of course. This gets rid of those pesky STP problems, and allows faster convergence.

Actually, I would recommend you pick up the design book for CCDA and CCDP there are some great things in there you can benefit from.
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Joseph L. Brunner <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com<mailto:joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>> wrote:
I would stress multiple channeled, 10G links for all production uplinks, server grade blades in all chassis switches (now would be a good time to finalize your blade architecture to server grade blades, with deep asics). Avoid Xenpak and other end of life options. No use of 62 Micron fiber ANYWHERE even if someone tells you it can do 10g, etc.

Avoid use of features like DAI, DHCP snooping, NAC, etc that lock in Cisco as a switch vendor. It will be much better received if it can be applied equally to any vendor.

-Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com> [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com>] On Behalf Of Jason Kline
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 4:08 PM
To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
Subject: RE: LAN Standards Document

Dear GS Members,

I would appreciate any assistance if any of you CCIE's or non-CCIE's have a
LAN standards document that you can share. I am developing a LAN standards
document where I am working and any input or templates that GS members can
offer would be great. I have much of the document complete however would
like to compare what I have to what others in the industry have done. I am
following the Cisco Campus Overview document as a baseline for my
documentation. Any suggestions or documents are appreciated. I work in an
enterprise network with about one thousand nodes.

Regards,

Jason Kline, CCIE #24462 (R&S)

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Tue Aug 04 2009 - 04:37:23 ART