05-26-2007 07:32 AM - edited 03-05-2019 04:19 PM
I have 2 Cisco 2950G-12-EI, S1&S2 connected with two uplink cable as the other one is redundant.
S1/P11 connected to S2/P11
S1/P12 connected to S2/P12(Blocking State)
How I can enable the S2/P12 to forward state, so that if I have a host connected in S1&S2, I want to Ping from HostA(S1) to Host(S2) or vice versa and I dont want to encounter any timeout even I remove anyone of the uplink cable. Please help me to solve this issue, thanks.
05-26-2007 07:44 AM
Hi Mahmoud,
The concept of STP is to block redundant link for loop avoidance. In your setup there is a loop and STP is doing its job blocking redundant port and once your primary link goes down second link which is currently in blocking state will become active but YES that will take its own convergance time and there will be loss of connectivity for few seconds.
WHY don't you configure etherchannel for the 2 links so that both the interfaces will be in fwding state and if any of the link in etherchannel goes down you still have second lin kin that etherchannel to take care of your data traffic.
HTH
Ankur
*Pls rate all helpfull post
05-26-2007 12:09 PM
Hi,
Yes etherchennel is perfect in this scenario like ankbhasi posts.
And its configured like this:
!
interface Port-channel1
switchport trunk native vlan 99
switchport mode trunk
switchport nonegotiate
interface FastEthernet0/1
switchport mode trunk
switchport nonegotiate
no ip address
channel-group 1 mode on
!
interface FastEthernet0/2
switchport mode trunk
switchport trunk native vlan 99
switchport nonegotiate
no ip address
channel-group 1 mode on
!
HTH
BR,
Bjornarsb
05-26-2007 07:37 PM
Hi, thanks for the information. I know etherchannel is the solution, but my boss wants this scenario. He wants to connect a 3 2950G-12-EI switch with loop and another redundant loop a total of 12 physical ports to be combine or channel-group as one logical ports. The questions is, is it possible to balance the two logical ports on a forwading state, so that even he remove any uplink connections he will not encounter any timeout while he's pinging from HostA(S1) to HostB(S2). I'll attached here the diagram of the scenario. I already use #channel-group 1 mode desirable non-silent, but as far as I know, a one channel-group has only eigth members port allowed, but on this scenario it has a total of 12 ports that needs to combine as on logical ports, so that all the ports are in forwading state. I know this really overkill connection, im just following my boss. I hope you can help me to solve this or just give a good explanation if this is not possible. Thank you and I will wait for your reply.
05-26-2007 08:55 PM
Yes, It is possible. You can create multiple ether-channel groups per switch. Configure 2 channel groups on each switch and have the neighor switch ports assign to the same group. For example :
Create channel group 1 on Switch A to have a 4 port-bundle to connect to Switch B and another channel group 2 a 4 port-bundle to connect to Switch C. Do the same on other switches.
But why do you want do that.. you might see it an overkill design. A 2 port etherchannel might suffice your need here.
HTH,Please rate if it does.
-amit singh
05-27-2007 07:04 AM
Hi, thank you for your help. I created a 3 logical channel in this scenario. Another questions, how I can minimize the timeout once I remove the first logical port. I'd try #span vlan 1 forward-time 4 and #span uplinkfast max-update-rate 1 on 3 switches. But once I removed the channel-group 1 that has 2 uplink ports, I encounter a 5 timeout a total of 20 seconds, is it possible to minimize this up to 2 timeout? thanks.
05-27-2007 08:27 AM
Why do you want to change the timers? 5 timeouts are normal.It is not suggested to change the timers as it can result in some undesired STP behaviour.
Anyways, in such a small network it should not make any problem. There are two ways to do it:
1. Change the STP timers Hello, fordward-delay and max-age timers as required and change it only on the root bridge in the topology.
2. Chek if you have RSTP support on the switches, if you have RSTP, then change the STP mode to it on all the switches. This will result in a faster convergence of the network topology and you will get the desired results that you are looking for.
HTH,Please rate if it does.
-amit singh
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide