Wired Intelligent Edge

 View Only
last person joined: 2 days ago 

Bring performance and reliability to your network with the HPE Aruba Networking Core, Aggregation, and Access layer switches. Discuss the latest features and functionality of your switching devices, and find ways to improve security across your network to bring together a mobile-first solution
Expand all | Collapse all

8360 Switches looped for redundancy

This thread has been viewed 11 times
  • 1.  8360 Switches looped for redundancy

    Posted May 17, 2023 04:43 PM

    We are putting several new 8360 switches in our datacenter. My boss was recalling being able to configure switches such that both switches would be connected to the core switch and to each other. This way the switches both have a redundant link with each other. If the uplink port for one switch went down, then the traffic could travel from to the other switch and then to the core. This is a physical loop, but it could be logically programed so that a loop would not occur.
    Is this possible? If so, what is the command that would be used for this?

  • 2.  RE: 8360 Switches looped for redundancy

    Posted May 17, 2023 04:58 PM
    Hi! isn't maybe your boss referring to VSX clustering (of two Aruba 8360) and then uplinking both VSX Cluster's members to your Core via VSX LAG (also known as Multi-Chassis LAG)? The Core will just have a LAG as downlink interface to the VSX Cluster's member (the VSX appears as a single logical unit from a peer standpoint).

  • 3.  RE: 8360 Switches looped for redundancy
    Best Answer

    Posted May 17, 2023 05:01 PM

    I believe you are referring to VSX
    Take a look at section starting from page 25 for sample configs 


  • 4.  RE: 8360 Switches looped for redundancy

    Posted May 18, 2023 10:21 AM

    I had thought of that for the current switches. That is the main way I would know to do that.
    The configuration he was refering to was using older Procurve switches. I don't think those would have been capable of VSX. Are there any older protocols/configurations that he might have been referring to?