CSCO10675262 wrote:
Hi,
I have a router and 2 switches and I was wondering if it may be recommended to connect each switch to the same router for redundancy? An example of the network would be:
----------------Router----------------
| (OSPF cost 1) | (OSPF cost 10)
| |
switch A -------hsrp-------------Switch B
There would be different cost on the link from switch A and switch B to the router to setup the redundancy/preferred path, however not too sure if it may be a best practice/recommended?
An alternative I do know that is not recommended would be to setup bridging on the router and let spanning tree take care of the redundancy.
Thanks.
Depends on exactly what you are trying to do.
If the HSRP shown between the switches is actually HSRP running between the 2 interfaces on the router then this won't work as you can't assign 2 ethernet interfaces on the router from the same IP subnet.
However from the looks of your diagram it seems OSPF is running between the router and switches so can we assume the switches are L3 ?
If so then i would simply connect the switches to the router using L3 P2P links.If you do this then why prefer one path over the other ? It would be easier simply to use both paths. So config would look something like -
switch A
======
int gi0/1 <-- connects to router
no switchport
ip address 192.168.5.1 255.255.255.252
router ospf
network 192.168.5.0 0.0.0.3 area
switch B
======
int gi0/1 <-- connects to router
no switchport
ip address 192.168.5.5 255.255.255.252
router ospf
network 192.168.5.4 0.0.0.3 area
router
====
int gi0/1 <--- to switch A
ip address 192.168.5.2 255.255.255.252
int gi0/2 <-- to switch B
ip address 192.168.5.6 255.255.255.252
router ospf
network 192.168.5.0 0.0.0.7 area
If the switches are L2 then you are going to have run BVI between the 2 router interfaces. Note if you do this STP will block one of the links for you anyway.
Jon
