Our vendor has connected their S4148T switch pair (configured with vlt domain) to my switch pair (Catalyst 9300-24T).
We essentially have a criss-cross connection for full redundancy. the ports on both sides are configured as normal switch ports, not as trunks. There is a picture but here are the connections:
Catalyst 1: ports1/2 --> dell switch 1 port 51, dell switch 2 port 51
Catalyst 2: ports1/2 --> dell switch 1 port 52, dell switch 2 port 52
What seems odd to me is why spanning-tree isn't blocking one path? I'm seeing a large amount of TX discards on dell switches port 52 (switch goes to catalyst switch 2), but none on port 51 (switch goes to switch 1). On the other hand, I see lots of TX discards on catalyst switch 1 ports1/2, but none on switch 2 ports 1/2.
Is there any reason why they would have been configured as switch ports and not trunk ports? I would think if they were trunk ports, then spanning-tree would have started blocking a pair of ports (most likely switch 2, which has the higher port priority values).
