Switches, Hubs, and Modems
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Design questions

Go to solution
Regular Advisor

Design questions

OK I decided to start a new thread instead of continue on an old question

10.3.x.x/16 network right now

needs to be broke down to 6-8 vlans
we'll call them vlan10 vlan20 vlan30 vlan40 vlan50 vlan100 Servers vlan150 Servers vlan200 Management

I have the following hardware
2 - 5400zl - core
2 - 2900 - mid core
15 - 2848 (might be 2650) - edge?

so on top we have 2 5400
then 2 2900
and 5 stacks of 3 each 2650

Workstations will be on the bottom stacks of course...

Critical servers should be on the core or just below

Clear as mud?

So forgive me as a make a huge mess here...

Each stack of 3 switches will be a vlan

So stack one might be
All* ports will be untagged vlan10

What would the default gateway be of each stack? and what about the servers vlan?

^^^ this is the same for each stack of 3

now I'm confused

I have 2 more layers up, the mid and core

I guess i need soemone who's done this before to make recommendations

I DONT want all the vlan'stalking (of course)But the servers need to, and the servers need to talk the the clients etc...


I MUST HAVE redundancy... between the core and mid core and down to the edge...

I was told to do a meshed with costing? on part of the network and trunking from the "3 stacks"

Mohieddin Kharnoub
Honored Contributor

Re: Design questions


Before answering your questions, i have some comments about your design.

1- As we see in the picture you attached, each stack has 3 switches, one of them will connect by 2 links to the 2900 switches.

I suggest you connect the second link from the last switch in the stack, so 3 switches in the stack each two of them will have a link (at least) to one of the 2900 , and for better performance and redundancy 2 links will be better.

2- Again in the stack, i suggest you connect the first to the last, you have 3 switches, so connect 1-2 and 2-3 then 3-1 for better redundancy.

Now, configuration wise, if you have each stack in one Vlan, so just keep the stack without any configuration (an IP address in the same range of its Vlan for management) and create all the Vlans on the 2900, and untagg each port connect to a stack to an equivalent Vlan, then tagg all the Vlans on the uplinks from 2900 to the 5400.

Each stack's Gateway will be the IP address of the Vlan on the Routing Switch.
Say you do Routing on the 2900, so the default gateway for Stack 1 will be Vlan10 IP address on the 2900.

And if you are doing routing on the 5400, then again the default gateway of the stack will be the Vlan IP address on the 5400.

Do routing on the 5400, so you can control traffic between Vlans by using ACLs, and i suggest the redundancy on the edge that i mentioned above.

Good Luck !!!

Science for Everyone
Regular Advisor

Re: Design questions


What is the best way to provide redundancy with the 2 5400's?

Will ip routing only be enabled on one of them?

How can i have a failover with the two of them?

Should the 2900's be where they are? or should they just be another legg off the 5400's?

What will be the best protocal for linking the 2650's to teh 2900's and the 2900's to the 5400's? A trunk? something else?
Mohieddin Kharnoub
Honored Contributor

Re: Design questions


Redundancy on the Core can be achieved by running VRRP, but you need the Premium License for both 5400.

Also you can run MSTP for a fast L2 redundancy and better performance, and you can do that by creating an MSTP domain where Core1 is a Root for 3 or 4 Vlans, and Core2 is the Root for the rest 3 or 4 Vlans.

The only reason i didn't comment about the 2900 is that you connect them to both core with 10Gig links, otherwise i prefer to replace the 2800s with 2900 that has better performance and you can link to core by 10Gig but in this case you will have 2 Layers, Edge and Core and i prefer that solution (from my point of view) .

Anyway i suggest you to keep your solution scalable and ready for future expansion, so the 2900 on the edge is better that 2800 because it has 10 Gig links and mush better switching capacity.

Based on the design you made, i prefer you connect all the stack switches together with resilient links and run MSTP on all the switches, and VRRP between the 2 Cores.

And i prefer you link the 2900 to the 5400 by 10Gig links, (anyway you can't achieve by using the 4 10Gig links more than 28.8Gig).

Good Luck !!!

Science for Everyone
Regular Advisor

Re: Design questions

Could you edit the diagram i made and show me where to do what?

I'm more than happy to look up the comands and learn about what they do. But I leanr from having a good design, and then figureing out what to do...

make sence?
Mohieddin Kharnoub
Honored Contributor

Re: Design questions

Regular Advisor

Re: Design questions


I could not have asked for a better answer!

Thank you!!!

I will chew on this tonight (It's midnight in seattle) and draw this up tomorrow with IP's and get back to you with more questions.