I have 2 dot1q trunk fe interfaces on a 7206 connected to two different
thanks
If you want to have the same network (VLAN) on both switches, why not just trunk switches together and than trunk just one to 7206?
One other thing is usage of IRB so you can bridge your vlan subinterfaces and put address only on IRB interface (per vlan) so your switches would comunicate on L2 on the same VLAN and using L3 between VLANs. This could be bad because L2 traffic would be bridged over your router. I would better do the first combination.
my apologies for being unclear. there are two 7206s each trunked to each of the two 35xxs. i'm trying to figure out how to get maximum redundancy.
This is more like a philosophical question. Well, you could do it in many ways:
1) you could do everything on L3 so you could trunk every 7206 to every switch and use HSRP or similar protocol 2) you could connect 7206 together and switches together and still do IRB on routers so you would get L2 redundancy. The only thing important here is to figure out what happens when one of your L2 links is down, if the routing is still correct.As always, I would pick first option since I have some really bad (actually BAD) experiences with IRB (not on 7206 but....).
thanks for responding ivan. yes, option 1 is the approach i'm referring to, but, my specific question at this point is if all traffic destined for a given routable dot1q subinterface on the routers can get to it via either of the trunks to the two switches. in other words the sub int for a given vlan can only be defined on one router trunk interface, but, i'm also thinking trunks carry all vlan traffic (or can be confdigured to do so, at any rate), so can the dot1q trunk on the same router pass the traffic to the router and in a way that it will get routed correctly? kind of convoluted question - i hope it's clear.
Now I have to ask the question: do you have the same VLAN's (networks) on both switches? Are the switches somehow connected directly?
The reason that you are having a hard time figuring out a solution to this is that you are asking the wrong question, one which may have no answer, (well no elegant answer anyway and what other kind do we want?).
Two routers, two switches, connect each router to each switch with a trunk, connect the two switches with redundant trunks, HSRP done. Redundant link needed to AVOID split network in the event of trunk link failure.
My guess is that adding unnecessarily to this design will not produce a more reliable network.
"i'm trying to figure out how to get maximum redundancy."
Just go for ordinary redundancy instead.
Sorry if this is a bit terse but, however I do not have time to try to fix it right now.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required