Cisco Switches :: SG 200-26 Double Gbit Port Configured In Load Balancing And Failover
Sep 21, 2011
I've a network with 28 computers and 2 servers. Each server have a double Gbit port configured in Load Balancing & Fail Over.Now, I want to buy two Cisco's Switch SG 200-26 and I would know the best way to connect them and if it's possible to interconnect them with more than one cable to share the trafic.
1. Is this following solution a good one (does the link between swhitches will work when computers will access to servers) ?
We have two asa5520 configured as primary and standby unit in fail over configuration, and all is working properly. Is it possible, with this configuration (fail over), to configure vpn load balancing/clustering?
We are looking at purchasing and RV042 soon and have one cruitcial question. I am looking at having two internet connections running into the RV042. The only load balancing is going to be that all the VOIP traffic will go through one connection (eg WAN2) and then have all other traffic (such as web and email) through WAN1.
I am looking to have it so that if one of the internet connections goes down then it will failover EVERYTHING to the one that is working so both the VOIP and all the other traffic share the same connection until both WANs then go back online.
We have purchased a Cisco 1921 with twin ADSL after advice from a Cisco sales rep. However I am having trouble working out the load balancing/fail over config for the device.
I would like traffic to balance over both ADSL lines and if one goes down not to interrupt connectivity.
I had a look at ppp multilink but I am unsure our ISP (BT) support this?
!! Last configuration change at 13:18:34 UTC Tue Mar 29 2011!version 15.0service timestamps debug datetime msecservice timestamps log datetime msecno service password-encryption!hostname xxxxxx
1) 2 x ASA 5520, running 8.2 2) Both ASA are in same outside and inside interface broadcast domains – common Ethernet on interfaces 3) Both ASA are running single context but are active/standby failovers of each other. There are no more ASA’s in the equation. Just these 2. NOTE: this is not a Active/Active failover configuration. This is simply a 1-context active/standby configuration. 4) I want to share VPN load among two devices and retain active/standby failover functionality. Can I use VPN load balancing feature?
Active/Active failover is understood to mean only two ASA running multi-contexts. Context 1 is active on ASA1 Context 2 is active on ASA2. They are sharing failover information. Active/Active does not mean two independently configured ASA devices, which do not share failover communication, but do VPN load balancing. It is clear that this latter scenario will work and that both ASA are active, but they are not in the Active/Active configuration definition. Some people are calling VPN load balancing on two unique ASA’s “active/active”, but it is not
The other confusing thing I have seen is that VPN config guide for VPN load balancing mentions configuring separate IP address pools on the VPN devices, so that clients on ASA1 do not have IP address overlap with clients on ASA2. When you configure ip address pool on active ASA1, this gets replicated to standby ASA2. In other words, you cannot have two unique IP address pools on a ASA Active/Standby cluster. I guess I could draw addresses from external DHCP server, and then do some kind of routing. Perhaps this will work?
I am going to use a DQ77BK motherboard, which does "dual band" LAN. I have been told that with this, i can use two internet connections (from two different providers), so that when one fails, my computer still uses the other one. As you have understood, i need to be safetly connected to internet. I cannot have internet switched off in the middle of my work.
So, what do i need to do this ?
- Do i need 2 wifi cards, or would 1 "dual band" wifi card (like the Intel centrino 6200) be enough to handle it ?
I have a ASA5510 actve/standby and create one site to site VPN with remote peer ip address xx.xx.xx.xx, Our VPN traffic running on 6 mb internet link for video conferancing traffic.Now client give another link 2 mb internet and client told to us our data traffic runnig on 2 mb link but this data traffic running on the same remote peer IP xx.xx.xx.xx.Secondly request also they need failover over the ISP link.how we implement the same on ASA 5510.
The best option for load balancing between 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches located at one site and connecting to 2 X Cisco nexus 5548UP switches located at another site.
The sites are connected via a 1GB fibre connection. I am unable to use GLBP until GLBP is supported in further software releases.
now i have some problem on Cisco Switch 3750 and ASA 5510, i would like to do loandbalancing on Cisco Switch 3750 and Active/Standby on ASA 5510.
which topology that we can use on this diagram, i mean which protocol connect 3750(2unit) to ASA 5510(2unit) and ASA 5510 to 3750, which protocol 3750.
I am trying to understand what load balancing method is used on a port channel on a Nexus switch . I have a server connected by a VPC to two Nexus switches. The nexus switches are only acting as layer 2 switches. I have a 6509 connected via a upstream link that does all of the routing for my VLANS. If have a server connected to the Nexus switches and it talks to a server on my 6509 what load balancing happens on the Nexus going across VPC 27 which is a layer 2 trunk going up to my 6509. Is it done on layer 2 or layer 3 flows?
My Nexus shows the default load balancing configurations
Port Channel Load-Balancing Configuration:System: source-dest-ip Port Channel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol:Non-IP: source-dest-macIP: source-dest-ip source-dest-mac
Is it possible to use two different load balancing methods at each end of a port-channel between two switches?
We have a Cisco 6509 at one end of the port-channel and a Cisco blade switch 3020 at the other end. Right now, we are using "src-dst-ip" at both end of the port-channel. We would like to change this. That is, we would like the #3020 switch to use "src-dst-ip" while the 6509 switch should use the "src-dst-port".
Why we want to do this, the reason is that we have FWSMs on the 6509. I've read that by configuring "src-dst-port" on the 6509, one can get a better performance of traffic going through the FWSM. However, the issue is that the 3020 switch does not support "src-dst-port".
I have an inquiry about a configuration I deploy in a C2960 switch. I have configured a ether channel with 8 ports, the load balanced method is source mac address. The bundling protocol is LACP.
I have found the ether channel is not balanced as I expect. One of the eight interfaces is congested.
What I am attempting to achieve is to aggregate trunk ports out of a VMware server into a single logical connection to give as much bandwidth as possible, the switches are 3750X and are three stacked together with the server connections spread across the stack. What I am not sure about is if two port channel load balance protocols can happy co-exist on the switch, by default the switch is using MAC address load balancing and Vmware wants to use IP Source load balancing. As other trunks and channels exist on the switch I don't want to make a change that will affect the other live connections if changing this is a global setting and not local on the channel.
I have a dual-homed fabric (Nexus 2248 dual attached to two Nexus 5020's via vPC). On this Nexus 2248 is a server that has a four port LACP etherchannel. The ports do not appear to be load balancing correctly. The output below shows the four ports in use and it clearly shows port e138/1/10 as getting the most use. When I use the "show port-channel load-balance forwarding-path..." command on either of the vPC switches for various source and destination IP's that use this link, it shows them correctly load-balancing across the four ports. But we do not see this when looking at stats on both the server side and the switch side.
**************** Config info below. This is a vPC pair and the port configs are identical on both switches so I'm only showing the configs for one switch to keep it simple.
dc5020-3g# sh port-channel load-balance Port Channel Load-Balancing Configuration: System: source-dest-ip Port Channel Load-Balancing Addresses Used Per-Protocol: Non-IP: source-dest-mac IP: source-dest-ip source-dest-mac
I have a stack of 6 switches and I want to add another over the gbit connector using fiber. I already connected but I can acces the network from the new switch. I don't have any issues on my Stack all resources are available Do I need to do some special setup or connection to enable this? Can be stacked like the others? I already usen the 2 stacking port can i Add another switch?
Any good 24 port rack mountable Gigabit switch, that is managed. Is a HP ProCurve 1800-24G 24 port gigabit ethe switch J9028B decent ? Will i be happy ? I have currently a Dell 5224, that works, but it's getting old and for the life of me can't find rack ears AT ALL!! and i want it mounted so i can finish my rack installation.
budget is around 250-300$ 24 ports all gigabit and manage able for vlans etc etc.
I configured port security on my 2960 switches with the following commands: [code]
The problem is that when I should change someone's PC, first I disable port-secirity, then I clear all the mac addresses learned on the interface, then I plug the new PC and enable port-security. The new PC couldn't connect to the network and it's mac address has not be learned on the interface. Why?Which commands should I use to clear an old mac address and enable port-security with the new mac address.
we have cisco 6500 series switch and configured port channel on both switches with 2 gig interfaces on both switches.
When we enable the port channel mode to as desirable to the interfaces on both side and applied the port channel to physical interfaces switch will go down and if we remove on any one side switch will come up. we have enabled globally the following commands. [code]
I am testing rogue on wire using 5508 WLC and , I have a dedicated AP configured as rogue detector and configured the switch port where the Rogue detector is connected as trunk. I have plugged in an autonomous AP with open authentication to the same switch so that it can act as a rogue. On the WLC, I can see that Autonomous AP as rogue on Wire. But along with that I am seeing another AP as rogue on wire, even though i have plugged in only one Autonomous AP to the switch.
I have 2 Cisco 5520 ASAs and was configured for Fail over. Unfortunately our Primary ASA went down and Secondary becomes Active and network admin made lots of changes on Secondary Active ASA. What is the best practice to rejoin Primary as standby or active without loosing the existing configuration on Secondary Active ?
We have a quad port NIC on our Dell server.I want to take all 4 ports and plug it into our switch and have it all go to the same IP of the server and just have to share the data load in/out.Do I need to configure anything to do this?
i'm trying to accomplish the following:I want to trasport a bunch of vlan layer 2 etherchannel on a pair of layer3 connections, using L3 to load balance.i was considering a pair of options:
1) bridging + gre (non applicable since i cant bridge 2 interface beloging to a etherchannel to a tunnel)
2) L2TP is it possible to accomplish this with the above tecnology? any reference, configuration example?
3) AoMLPS is it possible to accomplish this with the above tecnology ? any reference, configuration example?
I cant modify topology, the routers used are ASR1001 It is mandatory that both sites have a layer2 connection between them.
I have a Cisco 2811 router with two HWIC-ADSL cards configured for dsl connection. I have two lines from the same ISP and i am load balancing between them. I have created a couple of SLA's to check the state of the connections and add to the routing table the two default routes if both are up or any one of them is up.My problem is that when i try to download big files (especially antivirus updates) the download at some point stops (especially the antivirus exits with an error of unreachability). If i shut down one line everything works fine.Could i use something (configuration-wise) to prevent this problem from happening?????Is there any way i can combine the two lines? They are simple ADSL connctions with static ip's.
One of our customer just purchased ASR1002 router, they have three internet links from different ISPs and they dont have any remote site, they have three different public IP pool as their respective ISPs. So, is it possible to load balance the internet traffic using all three link on Cisco ASR router ( IOS - Advance Enterprise Services)
I need to configure DSL Load Balancing on Core Cisco Switch 4506-E. I have a Router Cisco 2811 with 2GE Ports and a Firewall Cisco ASA5505. I have 8 Physical DSL Connections with 1Mb each. I need to combine that 8 Mb on Core Switch and allow each end user to access the Internet via the available DSL connection which means that every user has 8 Mb available.
We have an ASA5520 pair that we will be installing to load balance SSLVPN connections. Below is a portion of our configs pertaining to the VPN load-balancing feature (configured on both ASAs):My specific question is related to routing of return traffic to load-balanced VPN sessions. Is there some kind of persistence function that tells the return traffic which ASA to route back to? For instance, if ASA1 has a VPN connection having IP address 10.211.112.1 associated to it, and ASA2 has a VPN connection having IP address 10.211.112.100, how does the return traffic for each connection know which ASA to route back to?
Currently we have deployed site to site vpn between 2 asa 5510 model. one is corporate site and one is remote site. now we plan to use radware load balancer in which 2 isp will terminate. now if at a remote site wecreate only 1 ipsec tunnel and mention sigle isp peering. if one isp fails at corporate how remote site will be access by site to site vpn through 2 isp vpn. what thing we need to do over asa as well as load balancer at both end.
We just upgraded our Sg300 series switches to the new IOS so we can get CLI access. The upgrade went fine but it seems we have two login prompts, the first being completely unnecessary as you can just hit return to get by it. IE here is the progression:
1. Connect SSH
2. Receive a "login:" prompt. Anything can be entered here, including just return
3. Login banner is displayed
4. Username Prompt is then displayed. Valid username required
I am trying to get rid of that first login prompt (IE Step 2) as it is causing issues with our configuration software. I have tried every line and authentication command I can think of, the only thing that gets rid of it is using none authentication which obviously we can't stay with. how did you get around it?
