Solution Required!!!

[duahimanshu816]

Dear Experts,

I have been told to design the network  for our new project. I have been told to consider the redundancy and stability of the network. honestly i have never designed for a big project. I would be really grateful, if you could help me to achieved this with better way.  

thanks in advance.  :) 

Let me give you overview of my project. 

There will be 250 thin client users who are going to access simultaneously to centralized server over the network. (they are just going to access the web application). 

There will 10 scanner who are going to scan the pages (375000 pages in 7 hours. per page size is 5 kb) and send it to central server over the network.

Now whats in my mind:  I should ask for 6 (48 port) distribution stack switches and connect with thin client. 

and these 6 switches will connect to my access layer stack switches.  (I have  attached the rough network diagram. sorry for my bad drawing just was in hurry kindly bear with me)

(Connection details:-  all thin client are connected to distribution switches and distribution switches are connected to Access layer switch. (Distribution switch 1 port 1, Access layer switch1 port 1 and access layer switch 2 port 1 and so on. )

I have created ether channel between the distribution and access layer for redundancy and load balancing . 

as per my calculation:-3 GB of data is flowing in whole day while scanning document and 250 peoples are connecting to centralized server over the network.

Now questions and doubts:-

1. The topology i have suggested is it ok? can we create single ether channel and put all the switch into it ? or i should  create different ether channle for each switch.?

2. My boss says to think about it and try to reduce the quantity of the switches. is there any other way to do so?

3. what capacity of the switchs we should consider (for both access layer and distribution layer)

4. is there any better or best design can be suggested. 

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@duahimanshu816 wrote:

can we create single ether channel and put all the switch into it ? or i should  create different ether channle for each switch.? 

---

How IMPORTANT is this?  It has to be that critical because you want to design something with redundancy.  If you want to design something for redundancy then "the more the merrier" & put all uplink ports into an etherchannel.  

---

@duahimanshu816 wrote:

My boss says to think about it and try to reduce the quantity of the switches. is there any other way to do so? 

---

Build half and continue adding more ports/switch when the demand increases.  

---

@duahimanshu816 wrote:

what capacity of the switchs we should consider (for both access layer and distribution layer) 

---

What is the budget?  Do you need 10- or 40 Gbps uplink?  Do you need PoE+/uPoE?

PS:  Don't even try saying that 1 Gbps uplink will be sufficient.  For redundancy purposes, 10 Gbps is the minimum standard.

[duahimanshu816]

Thanks Leo for Reply,

Just for redundancy purpose will it be good?

Just wanna understand "to pur all uplinks into an ether channle?  you mean to say that i should create the single group and put all the uplink into it? as all switches are stack & working as a single logical unit. Am i getting you right? 

Its will be not poe but as you said 10 gpps is standard, I would recommend to management to get 10gbps switches.

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@duahimanshu816 wrote:

Just wanna understand "to pur all uplinks into an ether channle?  you mean to say that i should create the single group and put all the uplink into it? as all switches are stack & working as a single logical unit. Am i getting you right?  

Up to EIGHT (8) links for the same speed can be put in an etherchannel.

[duahimanshu816]

thanks.

one more question pls, is there any way to do redundancy on access layer switches as they are single and connecting 48 client on each.

[Leo Laohoo]

There is no redundancy if the downstream client is connected to a single switch (and that switch fails).

[Jaderson Pessoa]

Try something like it