[ale] Switch redundancy and physical network layout lameness

Jim Kinney jim.kinney at gmail.com
Wed Aug 5 11:39:03 EDT 2009


That's a very common situation. Solution: throw loads of cash into the
fire and run all new wires. REAL solution: keep spare baby switches
around. There's nothing wrong with the setup other than bandwidth
issues that can occur on the upstream ports. As long as the physical
situation is similar to the network situation (i.e. most node traffic
is between nics on the single switch with some upstream) then this is
a good way to be organized.

The upgrade from this is to have redundant upstream lines and node
switches capable of using these as bonded pairs.

I don't recommend wireless in _any_ business environment other than
meeting rooms.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Chris
Kleeschulte<chris.kleeschulte at it.libertydistribution.com> wrote:
> I am trying to get a handle on our company's physical network.
>
> The problem I am running into is automatic switch redundancy. I have CARP
> for my pfsense boxes, but the physical network at this company is sort of a
> mess. We have switches that feed one cable out to a node where there is a
> small feeder switch that can branch 2-16 more times. I guess the company
> just did not want to go to expense of running a bundle of wires out.
>
> Before I hang my head in absolute shame over this, has anyone overcome this?
> Most of the problem is just growth. They ran 'n' cables in the beginning
> without thinking about printers and other potential IP nodes that may be
> used in the future.
> So the result pretty much looks like this, main switch -> small netgear 8
> port switch -> accountant's computer, his printer, his assistant's computer,
> her printer.
> We tried wireless and this works most of the time, but the building we are
> in seems to be grand central station for 11000 WAPs and they compete a lot
> with each other.
>
> Is this complete bush league or is this something that you have dealt with
> on the IT management side? I also just can't figure out a cost effective way
> to make this scheme fault tolerant. Any suggestions would be....excellent.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>
>



-- 
-- 
James P. Kinney III
Actively in pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness


More information about the Ale mailing list