Hot Downloads

Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Swicth Topology-Failover vs Performance

Swicth Topology-Failover vs Performance 5 years 8 months ago #38121

  • koslyr
  • koslyr's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Frequent Member
  • Posts: 20
  • Karma: 0
I want to connect a mid-platform (2 Web Servers , 2 Database-Servers, 1 SAN) to my enterprise network where exists three Cisco Switches.
For the moment i have two main topologies to choose to implement.
The first one has an inter-link between the Switches in order to provide a redundancy path.
At the second topology there is not redundancy at Switch level, but there is an additional link (bandwidth) towards upper aggregation Switch.
Which of these two topologies seems to be better according to yours opinion and experience?
At the second topology is it possible to arise connectivity problems due to two-way paths of each web-server to the two Switches?
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: Swicth Topology-Failover vs Performance 5 years 8 months ago #38126

  • chrnxR
  • chrnxR's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • Posts: 19
  • Thank you received: 6
  • Karma: 3
hey koslyr,

If you can't go for both, redundancy and bandwith, i'd always prefer to choose the redundancy solution so no one can blame you if the worst case happens.

safety first :laugh:

the dreams of yesterday are the hopes of today and the reality of tomorrow.

-Robert H. Goddard
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.095 seconds


Cisco Routers

  • SSL WebVPN
  • Securing Routers
  • Policy Based Routing
  • Router on-a-Stick

VPN Security

  • Understand DMVPN
  • GRE/IPSec Configuration
  • Site-to-Site IPSec VPN
  • IPSec Modes

Cisco Help

  • VPN Client Windows 8
  • VPN Client Windows 7
  • CCP Display Problem
  • Cisco Support App.

Windows 2012

  • New Features
  • Licensing
  • Hyper-V / VDI
  • Install Hyper-V


  • File Permissions
  • Webmin
  • Groups - Users
  • Samba Setup