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

SVI VERSUS NO SWITCHPORT INTERFACE

Hello,

I'm trying to deploy a solution where i have to connect 2x6500 core switch's in a redundant connection to other 2x6500 switch, in a full mesh configuration.

I'm thinking in using layer 3 interfaces (ip add in gigabit interfaces) to connect the 4 catalyst.

Cam any one tell me waht are the advantages for using no switchporr interfaces versus svi interfaces in this scenario ?

Many Thanks

4 REPLIES

Re: SVI VERSUS NO SWITCHPORT INTERFACE

I would prefer using routed ports as SVI's would extend your spanning tree domain.

The connection seems to be your core connection and hence it is always recommended not to extend your VLAN/STP on the core

Also convergence would be faster in case of routed ports.

HTH, rate if it does

Narayan

New Member

Re: SVI VERSUS NO SWITCHPORT INTERFACE

Thanks for your answers

Hall of Fame Super Bronze

Re: SVI VERSUS NO SWITCHPORT INTERFACE

I agree with Narayan. SVI implementation is only useful when you are deploying L3 VLANs where devices need a gateway to send the packets.

If this is a point-to-point design, routed-ports is the perfect solution.

Purple

Re: SVI VERSUS NO SWITCHPORT INTERFACE

It really depends on what you are doing , if you never need to add devices on those 6509's into those subnets then use a routed port to feed the other switches . If you feel that you may need to extend those subnets to multiple switches in the future then you would need to use SVi's so that you could trunk the vlans to the access switches .

161
Views
0
Helpful
4
Replies
CreatePlease to create content