The backup switch could be a lower-end switch. It doesn't have to be an exact replica of the other one. This is a classic case of Layer 8 (finances) being as important as the lower layers. It's quite common for the redundant network to be less pricey but also have poorer performance than the primary network.
I do suggest testing performance and compatibility with the new switch being the root. Temporarily disable the 6509 and make sure there are no serious problems. Do the test during normal hours if possible so that you gather realistic data. You could warn your users that a test will be going on in case it fails. But you don't want to learn while a disaster is happening that your redundancy doesn't work. You wouldn't believe how many people have learned that the hard way. Test it beforehand. It sounds like the servers are currently connected to the 6509 and that you plan to manually move them if the 6509 dies. Could you afford to dual home the servers instead so that the failover to the new switch is automatic? Most network designers would insist that it must be automatic, but I've worked with quite a few cost-conscious customers who are willing to accept the longer downtime associated with a manual failover in order to save money. But automatic failover is definitely something to consider. Either way, make sure you test the server failover before disater happens and panic sets in. ;-) _______________________________ Priscilla Oppenheimer www.troubleshootingnetworks.com www.priscilla.com Azhar Teza wrote: > > I have a customer who has (1) 6509 backbone switches which is > also acting as a root bridge. (7) 3524 are connect back to > 6509 via fiber each as a seperate unit. At this point, if 6509 > fails whole network will go down. I suggested to have an > additional switch run in standby mode as a backup backbone > switch. Customer doesn't want to spend around 40,000 to buy a > 2nd 6509 switch. Can the backup switch be another Catalyst say > 4000 or does it have to be the exact same model. I know the > performance will be downgraded since 4000 series don't have > the same switching backplane as opposed to 6509, but still it > should take over as a root bridge incase 6509 goes down. In > this configuration, the only thing they will have to do is to > move their servers to the 4006 switch until the 6509 comes back > online. All I need to make sure that the both 6509 and 4006 > switch have the same configuration. Is there anything I am > missing, please shed some lights guys. Teza > > ------------------------------------------------ > Changed your e-mail? Keep your contacts! Use this free e-mail > change of address service from Return Path. Register now! > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=54643&t=54614 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
