Wired Intelligent Edge

What would be the best way to add a pair of stacked 3810M switches to our existing SAN of two ProCurve 6600s that are configured in a distributed trunk? Would it be best to create a trunk that spans both 3810s over to the first 6600, and another similar trunk destined for the second 660? I wasn't sure what kind of trunk to implement and if you could split it across the stacked 3810s.

6600 has only 4 SFP+ ports with the rest 1 Gig Ethernet.

3810M has 16 SFP+ ports.

Hi

If you stack two 3810M switches they logically become one switch. And if the 6600 have a distributed trunk you could setup a trunk (two ports total, one per 3810M) to the first 6600 and a second trunk to the second 6600. Setup is up as you would connect a server redundant to both 6600’s.

On the 3810M setup the trunk as a lacp, on the 6600 as a dt-lacp if I am not mistaken. But this was some time ago and I can’t test it in my lab. No legacy hardware, sorry. So check with manual of 6600 to be sure.

Hope it helps

Frank is right, you would configure dt-lacp LAGs on the 6600s and LACP LAGs on the 3810s like so:

 

6600(config)# trunk 20,21 trk1 dt-lacp

 

3810(config)# trunk 1/1,2/1 trk1 lacp

 

Justin

Ok, thanks, Justin. So that would be for the first 6600? The second would be similar, correct? ...

 

6600 primary to 3810 stacked:

6600(config)# trunk 20,21 trk1 dt-lacp

3810(config)# trunk 1/1,2/1 trk1 lacp

 

6600 secondary to 3810 stacked:

6600(config)# trunk 20,21 trk2 dt-lacp

3810(config)# trunk 1/2,2/2 trk2 lacp

Also, why would the 6600 need to be configured in dt-lacp vs standard lacp? If the stacked 3810s are logically one switch, shouldn't it be lacp on both sides of the trunk?

Because the 6600 does distributed trunking!!!

And the 3810M doesn’t.

Sent from a mobile device

Disclaimer: Dit e-mail bericht is alleen bestemd voor de geadresseerde, verstrekking aan en gebruik door anderen is niet toegestaan. Indien u niet de geadresseerde bent, wordt u vriendelijk verzocht de verzender hiervan op de hoogte te stellen en het bericht te verwijderen. In verband met de elektronische verzending kunnen aan de inhoud van dit bericht geen rechten worden ontleend.

Yes, that configuration would be correct.

 

As with what Frank said, since we're using DT, we need to use the dt-lacp option so that the DT-LACPDUs can be sent out over the DT pair's links to share the LAG information between the DT pair and 3810s.

 

Justin

Sorry to beat this horse to death, but one more question... I would think the DT-LACP would be configured on the 6600 if the design was like the second one below. Can you confirm, or explain the difference between the two? Thanks!

 

Design 1

6600 primary to 3810 stacked:

6600(config)# trunk 20,21 trk1 dt-lacp

3810(config)# trunk 1/1,2/1 trk1 lacp

 

6600 secondary to 3810 stacked:

6600(config)# trunk 20,21 trk2 dt-lacp

3810(config)# trunk 1/2,2/2 trk2 lacp

 

Design 2

6600 primary:

6600(config)# trunk 20 trk1 dt-lacp

6600(config)# trunk 21 trk2 dt-lacp

 

6600 secondary:

6600(config)# trunk 20 trk1 dt-lacp

6600(config)# trunk 21 trk2 dt-lacp

 

 

3810 stack:

3810(config)# trunk 1/1,1/2 trk1 lacp

3810(config)# trunk 2/2,2/2 trk2 lacp

 

 

 

 

You'll want the trunks balanced over the 3810 stack for redundancy in the case of a stack member issue/failure.

 

 

 

Hi

The 3810M stacked can be considered as one logical switch. But the two 6600’s are NOT one logical switch. As there will be a link between the two 6600’s you need to try to avoid spanningtree.
So on the 3810M stack create a trunk (lacp) out of 4 interfaces. Two will be connected to 6600-1 and two will be connected to 6600-2. On both 6600’s create a two port dt-lacp based trunk. And the 6600’s will have a isl between them.
From the view of the 3810M it can be considered as a 4 port lacp.

Hope this helps