Eildor wrote: » Wouldn't simply running a FHRP such as VRRP at both the access layer switches achieve this sort of redundancy?
MickQ wrote: » Assuming layer two access switches, you could hard code HS/VRRP for what you propose and load balance different VLANs. Usefulness of this in network loactions will vary. Alternatively, you could use GLBP which will actively load balance. Drawback - Cisco proprietary. Of course, we can pick door number 3. This is using layer 3 switches in the access layer. Bye bye (most) STP considerations and L2 redundancy problems. Routing takes over and things can run smoother, as long as your designs are right.
MickQ wrote: » Think about it. What does FHRP work off?
MickQ wrote: » Not if it's layer 3 all the way to the edge (end devices). That way your network links are starting at layer 3 and layer 2 is between only the end device and the switch port (which also have layer 3 connectivity!) and doesn't spread across to other switches. Yeah, a bit of a paradigm shift.
MickQ wrote: » What's the difference in the server doing it at L3 compared to L2? Besides, it's not the server that should be doing the job of the network. If there is a failure, the routing protocols kick in and deal with the failure (typically) faster than L2 technologies. Having said that, be aware that different server technologies might push you towards different network deployment methods.
MickQ wrote: » Most likely. You'll have a nice eurika moment when you see how it's used. Maybe you should take a look at the design cert material to give a clearer idea of what's going on.
MickQ wrote: » Excellent question. I'd still configure a management interface on the device for telnet/ssh access. Your gateway would depend on your network layout, but might be on the same switch or a number of hops away. Best of luck with your studies. Don't be afraid to delve more into network stuff that interests you.