- Community Home
- >
- Networking
- >
- Legacy
- >
- Switches, Hubs, Modems
- >
- Re: Spanning-tree redundant links on seperate vlan...
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-09-2011 10:33 PM
07-09-2011 10:33 PM
Spanning-tree redundant links on seperate vlans blocked
Hi,
I have 2 switches (Procurve 2610) connected on a single link with only default VLAN. Both swtiches are configured with MSTP.
Then I added another link between these 2 switches, the 2 ports for this new link on both switches are on vlan 200.
The client PC on VLAN 200 of both ends cannot talk, one of the ports on the vlan 200 link is blocked by Spannning-tree. I read the manual and got to know that I can have only one link between 2 switches by tagging the ports with vlan 200 and vlan 1 as spanning-tree would disable the redundant link.
Is it possible to use 2 links between the switches, one on vlan 1 another on vlan 200 with Spanning-tree in placed (without the port blocked)? We would prefer to have 2 links as this provide better bandwith than 1 link with both vlan traffic.
Thanks
Pei
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-10-2011 02:07 AM
07-10-2011 02:07 AM
Re: Spanning-tree redundant links on seperate vlans blocked
Hi,
In theory you can do what you propose, but what you'd really want is a so called Trunk. A trunk combines two or more links into one virtual port seen by STP etc.
Have a look at this: http://cdn.procurve.com/training/Manuals/2610-MCG-Sept09-R_11_40-59918640.pdf section 12 "Port Trunking"
CCIE Service Provider
MASE Network Infrastructure [2011]
H3CSE
CCNP R&S
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
07-10-2011 04:13 PM
07-10-2011 04:13 PM
Re: Spanning-tree redundant links on seperate vlans blocked
Best option would be to setup a trunk as the above poster mentions. you would then tag both vlans to the trunk and let the switch balance the load across both links.
However if you really want to keep the links for each VLAN separate then you will need to look in to setting up multiple instances within the MSTP setup. You would then assign each VLAN to a different instance and configure the weighting on the ports to force the VLAN traffic down the individual ports. You will still need to make sure that both VLANs are bound to both link ports otherwise if you have a link failure you would stop one VLAN from passing between the switches.