What's the best practice for Stackwise regarding priorities?

Unanswered Question
Jan 30th, 2009
User Badges:

What's the best practice for Stackwise regarding priorities?

1. Manually specify Master and Second Master or

2. Specify Master but left the rest of members with the same lower priorities

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Giuseppe Larosa Fri, 01/30/2009 - 13:30
User Badges:
  • Super Silver, 17500 points or more
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

Hello Cedar,

first option is better to have more chances that the master will be a switch that is expected to take this role

Hope to help


fsebera Fri, 01/30/2009 - 13:49
User Badges:
  • Bronze, 100 points or more

Hey Cedar,

We just deployed about 80 Cisco 3750 stackable switches (many different stacks). We made the access layer (where the pc's, printers etc connect) layer-3. Each stack of 3750 switches were configured manually with the master being set at 15, and the next switch (physically) in the stack set at 14 and so on until you reach the end (bottom) of the stack.

switch 1 priority 15

switch 2 priority 14

switch 3 priority 13


no boot auto-copy-sw

switch 1 provision ws-c3750-48p

switch 2 provision ws-c3750-48p

switch 3 provision ws-c3750-48p


stackmaker name NYC-switch-1



BTW, if you let the switches decide who is the master it works pretty well until you have to troubleshoot 'em than disaster sets in and somebody must pay.

glen.grant Fri, 01/30/2009 - 16:53
User Badges:
  • Purple, 4500 points or more

We do it the same way as fsebera , make master 15 and each succesive switch in the stack  1 less in the priority.


This Discussion