Baystack 470's and Fiber
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Posted by Mikhael47 on January 12, 2007, 12:32 pm
Please log in for more thread options 48's are in our main building and the two 24's are in an adjacent building. The pair of devices on each side are stacked. I have two fiber loops joining the devices together. For a long time, we had both GBICs connected at the same time (one on each unit). This morning, we came in, and our entire network was down. The activity lights on the ethernet drops were all on solid. After some poking around I decided to yank one of the GBICs out and the network calmed down. Should one GBIC be active on each of the switches or is it OK to have 2 active (one from-to each switch)?? Is there any aggregate bandwidth increase or fault tolerance gained by having both connected at once? Alternatively is there any problems with plugging both loops in at the same time? Thanks Mike | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by MC on January 12, 2007, 7:00 pm
Please log in for more thread options tree is enabled on all fiber ports at each end, however spanning tree will block one connection and keep the other up. | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by Mikhael47 on January 14, 2007, 12:30 pm
Please log in for more thread options
> >
> either need to have MLT configured on each end or make sure spanning
> tree is enabled on all fiber ports at each end, however spanning tree > will block one connection and keep the other up. Ok, is MLT support from 470 to 470 or only from 470 to passports? I will look into the spanning tree... | |||||||||||||
|
Posted by MC on January 14, 2007, 2:32 pm
Please log in for more thread options Mikhael47 wrote:
>> either need to have MLT configured on each end or make sure spanning
>> tree is enabled on all fiber ports at each end, however spanning tree >> will block one connection and keep the other up. >
Nortel switch to any Nortel switch supports MLT
> Ok, is MLT support from 470 to 470 or only from 470 to passports? > > I will look into the spanning tree... > | |||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Baystack 470's and Fiber | January 12, 2007, 12:32 pm |
| Baystack 460-24T-PWR Fiber Optic Module poblems | August 4, 2005, 4:45 pm |
| Nortel option 21 to MCR via fiber | October 20, 2005, 7:59 am |
| 460 24T-PWR switch and fiber issue... | February 1, 2006, 6:43 pm |
| Wich fiber connector do I need? | March 21, 2007, 12:08 pm |
| PP8600 fiber ports failing | February 15, 2005, 4:23 pm |
| Norstar MICS Fiber ASM Technical Expertise Required | April 2, 2006, 9:18 am |
| Baystack 450 & 470 | July 18, 2005, 2:44 am |
| Baystack 460 24T Pwr | January 8, 2006, 10:04 pm |
| Pb with baystack 450 | September 12, 2007, 4:57 am |
| baystack 450-24t 470-48t | March 2, 2008, 8:32 am |
| Baystack 470 not booting | March 4, 2005, 5:11 pm |
| Radius & Baystack 450 | May 17, 2005, 4:16 pm |
| baystack 425 switches | July 15, 2005, 7:30 pm |
| Switch BayStack 310-24T | September 28, 2005, 9:00 pm |
> 48's are in our main building and the two 24's are in an adjacent
> building. The pair of devices on each side are stacked.
>
> I have two fiber loops joining the devices together. For a long time,
> we had both GBICs connected at the same time (one on each unit).
>
> This morning, we came in, and our entire network was down. The
> activity lights on the ethernet drops were all on solid. After some
> poking around I decided to yank one of the GBICs out and the network
> calmed down.
>
> Should one GBIC be active on each of the switches or is it OK to have 2
> active (one from-to each switch)??
>
> Is there any aggregate bandwidth increase or fault tolerance gained by
> having both connected at once?
>
> Alternatively is there any problems with plugging both loops in at the
> same time?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
>