Redundant 6500 sup module behavior

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by linguafr, Aug 6, 2008.

  1. linguafr

    linguafr Guest

    I understand that you can only run in active-standby mode, however,
    I've read that the interfaces on the standby unit are active. Does
    this mean you can forward L2 traffic through them?

    Thx
     
    linguafr, Aug 6, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. linguafr

    Trendkill Guest

    How would you forward it, make the spantree priority lower? Even
    then, the other module would be routing in/out of the VLAN, so what
    would this really buy you in terms of balancing, presuming that is
    what you are after? Not sure I follow the requirement.
     
    Trendkill, Aug 6, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. linguafr

    linguafr Guest

    For use as additional uplink ports or redundant ports. If the active
    sup goes down it provides L2 redundancy
    I noticed this reference
    With Release 12.2(18)SXD and earlier releases, when a redundant
    supervisor engine is in standby mode, the two Gigabit Ethernet
    interfaces on the redundant supervisor engine are always active.
    In this doc. This is apparently referring to a 720, while we're going
    with 32s so I'm not clear on distinctions in this behavior or if this
    implies the ports are actually active in spanning-tree, etc.
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/swi...ive/configuration/guide/nsfsso.html#wp1118191
     
    linguafr, Aug 6, 2008
    #3
  4. linguafr

    Trendkill Guest

    Ah I'm with you. So you are trying to use the physical ports on the
    sup's for hot standby in case the other ports go down. In this case
    you can't channel them with the ports on the first sup, because I
    don't think you can channel ports on different modules. Which means
    these would be a 2nd set of links to the same switch as the first set
    of supervisors (probably links to a 2nd sup on the other switch). So
    unless you are connecting different networks, I would think that these
    are not actively forwarding traffic. If you were connecting them to
    different switches it would work, but presuming the modules are for
    full physical/logical redundancy, I don't see how the ports would be
    sending/receiving traffic if its the same config, same trunk or
    connection, etc. I could be missing something....
     
    Trendkill, Aug 6, 2008
    #4
  5. linguafr

    m.a.pi Guest

    i'd like to give some comments....
    what about uplink using in "ring" L2 topology, where each ring's side
    created on Sup's uplinks???
    thanks
     
    m.a.pi, Aug 21, 2008
    #5
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.