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

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

redundant connectivity

i have two 4006 distribution switch with 16 (3550 switch) under them and i want to link the 16 access switches to the two 4006 switch redundantly and i am confused on how to do it with the best performance ...

1- connect the 2 GBIC of the 3550 switches one to the 4006 (ws-x4318 module ) and the other to the GBIC port to the other 4006 ( (ws-x4318 module)

2- connect any fast eathernet port from the 3550 switch to both 4006 switches in the (ws-x4124 fx mt module) wihout the need to use GBICs ports and also without the need to have the (ws-x4318 18 GBIC port module).

Can You please advice me what is the right solution ...

and another question ... can i use the ws-x4232-RJ L3 in layer 3 operations instead of using the supervisor engine III

i ll appreciate your help

1 REPLY
Cisco Employee

Re: redundant connectivity

I believe you are referring to WS-X4418-GBIC module as we do not have a 4318 blade. WS-X4418-GBIC is designed for servers(bursty traffic) and not for switch aggregation. On a WS-X4418-GBIC, only ports 1 and 2 are non blocking while ports 3 through 18 are oversubscribed

http://cio.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat4000/hw_doc/mod_inst/01overvw.htm#xtocid19

If you have the luxury, I suggest that you use WS-X4306 modules for aggregation as all ports are non blocking.

Regarding your question on whether to use fastethernet, it depends on your traffic patterns. You cannot use a WS-X4232-L3 module in a CAT4006 with Supervisor 3 Engine. If you are looking for IPX routing support, we have released 12.1(12c)EW today which supports IPX/AT routing

82
Views
0
Helpful
1
Replies