Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Community Member

LAN core switch redundancy

Hello everyone - first time posting, but I will try to be very clear with my objectives - thanks in advance for your help.

We have a data center that has a Cisco 6513 Core right now with 13 blades.  This core has all of our servers and users plugged into it and the other day we lost it for 4 hours and all LAN users were disconnected.  Additionally, data on our servers was innacessible because those servers too were connected to the core.

We need to introduce some redundancy into this setup and I'm really looking for a really solid way to achieve this and looking for opinions, like "pie in the sky" solutions if money were not really an object.

One option I thought of right away so far was to leave the core for our users and keep them plugged into it, but upgrade our wireless system (I believe they have 1G now) or something much stronger than we currently have and then if they lost connectivity to the core, they could connect to the wireless controller that would be connected to a new stacked switch we would purchase (probably 3570's) that would be directly connected to our existing router.

These 3570's could be plugged into each of our servers and be dual-homed so that again, if the core went down, the stacked switches would take-over and users in our Office (about 200 of them) could still work temporarily until the core was restored.  If both this new proposed core and the existing 6513 core were up, we would use both and just have more bandwith available.

What problems do you see with this configuration?  I believe it covers us because all our servers, even those that are critical to host to our WAN, would be dual-homed to the new 3570 side, so again, if we lose the core, we are still up from a system side serving data to the rest of the company (Outside our office).

What other options do people see, perhaps getting a completely redundant core?  But can you even find 6513's these-days and should we just buy the same one and put it in there?

Any other crazy ideas people have?  In case anyone is wondering, we do use virtualization with a SAN.

Thanks everyone, appreciate the time anyone takes to help with this scenario.

Everyone's tags (5)
5 REPLIES
Hall of Fame Super Gold

Re: LAN core switch redundancy

But can you even find 6513's these-days and should we just buy the same one and put it in there?

Cisco released the 6513E a few months ago.  Goes well with the new Sup2T (same price as the Sup720).  One thing with pairing Sup2T together is forming a VSS.  It's like joining two 3750 together to form a virtual swictch.

You may want to consider upgrading into something like this.

One of the benefits of joining two 6500E chassis together and form a VSS is, like the 3750, you configure both chassis as one.

Is your LAN a flat network?  If this is so, you need to re-design your network.

Community Member

LAN core switch redundancy

Thanks for the quick reply!  Our LAN has VLANs on it, but I guess I'm not sure if it's flat (don't think so).  Anyway to know easily?  I will ask our rep about the new 6513E for sure.

I'm also not sure what VSS is, if you care to explain, that would be great!

Thanks!

Hall of Fame Super Gold

Re: LAN core switch redundancy

Our LAN has VLANs on it, but I guess I'm not sure if it's flat (don't think so).  Anyway to know easily?

If your servers and users are plugged into one big VLAN or appliance (like the 6500) then it's safe to say it's as-flat-as-a-chessboard.

Community Member

Re: LAN core switch redundancy

that is correct - why did you call it a chess-board?

Anyhow, any further comments on how to add redundancy for our servers within our current core?

Thanks everyone...

Hall of Fame Super Gold

LAN core switch redundancy

why did you call it a chess-board?

It's just a "slang".

1587
Views
0
Helpful
5
Replies
CreatePlease to create content