Redundant 6500 sup module behavior

How would you forward it, make the spantree priority lower? Even then, the other module would be routing in/out of the VLAN, so what would this really buy you in terms of balancing, presuming that is what you are after? Not sure I follow the requirement.

For use as additional uplink ports or redundant ports. If the active sup goes down it provides L2 redundancy I noticed this reference With Release 12.2(18)SXD and earlier releases, when a redundant supervisor engine is in standby mode, the two Gigabit Ethernet interfaces on the redundant supervisor engine are always active. In this doc. This is apparently referring to a 720, while we're going with 32s so I'm not clear on distinctions in this behavior or if this implies the ports are actually active in spanning-tree, etc.

Ah I'm with you. So you are trying to use the physical ports on the sup's for hot standby in case the other ports go down. In this case you can't channel them with the ports on the first sup, because I don't think you can channel ports on different modules. Which means these would be a 2nd set of links to the same switch as the first set of supervisors (probably links to a 2nd sup on the other switch). So unless you are connecting different networks, I would think that these are not actively forwarding traffic. If you were connecting them to different switches it would work, but presuming the modules are for full physical/logical redundancy, I don't see how the ports would be sending/receiving traffic if its the same config, same trunk or connection, etc. I could be missing something....

i'd like to give some comments.... what about uplink using in "ring" L2 topology, where each ring's side created on Sup's uplinks??? thanks