cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
1013
Views
0
Helpful
8
Replies

3750G stack with new 3750X

hiren.pandya
Level 1
Level 1

Hi Mates,

I have situation where i have existing WS-C3750G-48TS is installed into the network.. i need to expand the LAN port capacity hence i am adding one more WS-C3750X-48T-S switch into the network and want to make it stack.

My existing WS-C3750G-48TS switch have 32 Mb flash.

Can you please guide me which IOS i should select and what will be step i should take to make it as stack switch.

Thanks,

HP

8 Replies 8

shillings
Level 4
Level 4

12.2(55)SE7 has been reported as a good stable IOS and will fit into 32MB flash, both 'IP Base' and 'IP Services' feature sets. SE8 has recently been released and includes a major security fix. Not sure if any members have rolled it out in large numbers yet.

Cisco recommends the 3750-X be configured as the stack master, when added to a mixed-hardware stack.

Make sure you run the same feature set on all the stack members.

Hi Shillings,

i have select c3750-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE.bin IOS in order to support stacking.

Current switch is 3750G-48TS (c3750-ipbasek9-mz.122-55.SE4.bin) and 32 mb flash.

i am adding new switch which is 3750X into Gig swtich

Can you please guide me for the implemantation process.

To be honest, I always download the configuration guide for the specific software release and follow that: -

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3750/software/release/15.0_2_se/configuration/guide/3750scg.pdf

Make sure you read the release notes for the specific maintenance release too: -

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3750x_3560x/software/release/15.0_2_se/release/notes/OL25302.pdf

Not that 12.2(55)SE4 doesn't have the 'Rolling Stack Upgrade' feature. You will be able to use that in future though, once you've upgraded to 15.0(2)SE.

Also, 15.0(2)SE3 includes a major OSPF security fix.

You will probably find this link useful too:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2216397?tstart=0

15.0(2)SE3

You can't download this version and I strongly recommend no one ATTEMPT to use this version.  SE3 has a major flaw in regards to AAA authentication.  SE3 has been "pulled" from the Cisco website. 

i have select c3750-ipbasek9-mz.150-2.SE.bin IOS in order to support stacking.

Don't even bother with this IOS either.  15.0(2)SE has a number of CPU Hog bugs carried over from 15.0(1)SE chain.

Are you using PoE or 802.1X (or both)?  If yes, then use 12.2(55)SE7 or SE8.  Avoid ALL VERSIONS of 15.0.

If you are NOT using either PoE or 802.1X (or both), then go with 15.0(2)SE4.

Thanks Leo, ref 15.0(2)SE3. I know IOS is a monster to thoroughy test, but it still makes me wonder if Cisco's product test team is sufficiently resourced and/or performing at their best.

 I know IOS is a monster to thoroughy test, but it still makes me wonder if Cisco's product test team is sufficiently resourced and/or performing at their best.

Hey Simon,

According to one of the Cisco guys, the original SE3 was tested, but did not have this AAA bug, was ready to be released.  Someone managed to slip in the AAA "enhancement" in the last minute and without testing.   So when it broke, it sure did took Cisco a week (or two) to pull this specific link out.   According to another Cisco guy, the delay was too much "paperwork".  Sad.

As for testing in my end of town, I didn't do much.  Just loaded a switch with our normal config and upgraded the IOS.  When the switch reloaded, the bug got triggered instantly.  Testing over.  Verdict?  FAIL.

According to one of the Cisco guys, the original SE3 was tested, but did not have this AAA bug, was ready to be released.  Someone managed to slip in the AAA "enhancement" in the last minute and without testing.   So when it broke, it sure did took Cisco a week (or two) to pull this specific link out.   According to another Cisco guy, the delay was too much "paperwork".  Sad.

I kind of feel better about that. Silly as it may sound, but at least it was old fashioned human error, motived by good intentions, rather than Cisco failing to give the team enough resource. Not a good day in the office for that person though. Still, I've certainly been there. Several years ago when working at an ISP, I had loads of telnet sessions open, was rushing, and reloaded one of our customer edge 7600 routers, instead of the intended CPE router! Will never forget the viral-like spread of red alerts quickly filling up the NOC monitoring screens as a few thousand customers lost connectivity for a couple of minutes. Ouch!

reloaded one of our customer edge 7600 routers, instead of the intended CPE router! Will never forget the viral-like spread of red alerts quickly filling up the NOC monitoring screens as a few thousand customers lost connectivity for a couple of minutes.

I can beat that.  Read this.

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: