09-23-2010 09:43 AM - edited 03-06-2019 01:09 PM
We just bought some new toys, 2 x 6506 with VSS sups
they are connected by 2 x 10gig links
I keep reading in the documentation that traffic should never traverse the VSL links , because you use etherchannels everywhere, but what if you have devices where etherchannel is not possible etc , why is it a problem traversing the VSS links when we need to? the sups are using very little of the 20 gigs
I am designing my network so that vss link doesnt get used , i just need to know there wont be a problem if there is a few that need it.
do i need to make extra etherchannel between the 2 switches for these leaks? ( the sup has 2 x sfp gig-e spare)
Solved! Go to Solution.
09-23-2010 10:16 AM
ukglobecast wrote:
Thanks very much John for confirming
I will put any single homed things to go via etherchanneled switches.
Could i pick your brain on something else ---I have 2 ASA5540s on active/standby , what is the best way to implement this in a VSS environment Just one on each vss switch ? the firewalls are currently dot1q trunks.
Rob
Never deployed it but i would recommned connecting one ASA to one of the chassis and the other ASA to the other chassis simply because if there is a chassis failure you would still have a firewall up and running.
Jon
09-23-2010 10:03 AM
ukglobecast wrote:
We just bought some new toys, 2 x 6506 with VSS sups
they are connected by 2 x 10gig links
I keep reading in the documentation that traffic should never traverse the VSL links , because you use etherchannels everywhere, but what if you have devices where etherchannel is not possible etc , why is it a problem traversing the VSS links when we need to? the sups are using very little of the 20 gigs
I am designing my network so that vss link doesnt get used , i just need to know there wont be a problem if there is a few that need it.
do i need to make extra etherchannel between the 2 switches for these leaks? ( the sup has 2 x sfp gig-e spare)
Rob
The VSL will pass data traffic as well as VSL control packets so you don't need a separate etherchannel but as you say you should do your utmost to avoid having to use the VSL for data traffic.
To be honest you shouldn't really be connecting any singly honed devices into the VSS pair anyway. If you have servers that only have on NIC you would be better off having these on a separate switch and then running an etherchannel from that switch across the VSS pair.
Jon
09-23-2010 10:11 AM
Thanks very much John for confirming
I will put any single homed things to go via etherchanneled switches.
Could i pick your brain on something else ---I have 2 ASA5540s on active/standby , what is the best way to implement this in a VSS environment Just one on each vss switch ? the firewalls are currently dot1q trunks.
09-23-2010 10:16 AM
ukglobecast wrote:
Thanks very much John for confirming
I will put any single homed things to go via etherchanneled switches.
Could i pick your brain on something else ---I have 2 ASA5540s on active/standby , what is the best way to implement this in a VSS environment Just one on each vss switch ? the firewalls are currently dot1q trunks.
Rob
Never deployed it but i would recommned connecting one ASA to one of the chassis and the other ASA to the other chassis simply because if there is a chassis failure you would still have a firewall up and running.
Jon
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