new switch to existing network

[Shibu1978]

Dear All,

I would like to get some clarification regarding my network expansion. I am planning to add two more Cisco SW 4510 to the existing  setup  ( SW3 & SW4) . Attached is the diagram which i have updated with 2 more switches.

Kindly clarify me the below.

1) As attached diagram extend 10G connection from  SW3 to SW1 & SW2 similiarly  SW4 to SW1 & SW2.   Between SW1 & SW2 HSRP is configured with static routing on the vlans. All the Vlans active unit is being SW1.   In this case do we required to have direct connectivity between SW3 & SW4. What would be the best way to have this 2 switches connect to the existing network?

Thanks for your input.

[JohnTylerPearce]

Well SW3 and SW4 will each have a 10g link blocked due to spanning tree, if this is a L2 link. Is there a purpose for the expansion, such as adding more users, etc etc?

As long as you setup the appropriate trunks, and verify all vlans that need to traverse the trunk are there, you should be fine, depending on what else you want to configure on the trunk.

You could always add another 10g link and create an etherchannel to each switch, but depending on how your link connectivity is setup, such as SFP+ ports, fiber runs, all that can get expensive.

[Shibu1978]

Thanks John for reply on this.

John :  Well SW3 and SW4 will each have a 10g link blocked due to spanning tree, if this is a L2 link. Is there a purpose for the expansion, such as adding more users, etc etc?

Yes one link will be blocked on SW3 & 4  as it is L2 Link .    basically we are adding more channels on the IPTV platform hence this expansion.  bunch of Encoders & decoders would be added on the new switches.

As i mentioned do we require to have direct fiber trunk link between SW3 & SW4  is it neccessary?  will it add any value ?

John:  As long as you setup the appropriate trunks, and verify all vlans that need to traverse the trunk are there, you should be fine, depending on what else you want to configure on the trunk.

Basicaly all the vlans on the Sw1 ( which is the HSRP vlan active switch) would be extended to Sw3 & 4. On the current setup Encoders( Multicast sources) main & backup interface connections are being terminated on Sw1 & Sw2.  Similary all the expansion Encoders main & backup interface connections will be terminated on Sw3 & 4.     

PIM SM is running on SW1 & Sw2 .  planning to have SW3 & Sw4 are just L2 switches. IP routing will be disabled on these switches. Hope multicast receivers still can access source encoders configured on the SW3 & Sw4.   any suggestions here?

John : You could always add another 10g link and create an etherchannel to each switch, but depending on how your link connectivity is setup, such as SFP+ ports, fiber runs, all that can get expensive

No plan as of now.

[JohnTylerPearce]

This these switches are in support of a multicast source, just make sure they are not blocking IGMP, running the appropriate version of IGMP, which is probably IGMPv2. Since SW3 and SW4 are running just L2, you shouldn't need PIM-SM running on these switches.

When the Multicast Source transmits traffic, it's going to go to it's First-Hop-Router, first, then the first-hop-router, is going to register that source with the RP.

If the Multicast Source needs to access a specific encoder, just make sure network connectivity is configured and you should be fine.

Since these are two new switches, I would test before putting everything into production behind them.

Please feel free to ask more questions.

[Shibu1978]

Thanks john for your quick reply.

As i mentioned do we require to have direct fiber trunk link between SW3 & SW4  is it neccessary?

will it add any value ?

[JohnTylerPearce]

Since these are 4500's, it will depend on the line cards you have installed. If you have nothing but fiber line cards, then you obviosuly will have to use fiber, but if you have FastEthernet or GigabitEthernet line cards, then you don't have to use fiber.

As long as a cable run is there, and it's the proper cable, this shouldn't be an issue.

[Shibu1978]

Thanks john.

I hope you u did not get me. i am talking about the direct connection between SW3 & Sw4 . is it good to have this connection? 

Kindly refer the attached digram with "red" line.

Thanks

[JohnTylerPearce · Accepted solution]

There is nothing wrong with that connection. It's going to be blocked by spanning tree most likely, but it's not going to hurt anything. For instance if there is a physical issues better SW3 and Sw1 and SW3 and SW2 it will use this path instead, so it's just going to add more redundancy.

[Shibu1978]

I was thinking for more redundancy hence added this link.

Thanks John.

Hope the expansion switches as L2 will work on the  mutilcast setup as we want.

Thanks again.