Hi pjsjr627,
If i understand your diagram rightly, the only thing different in the two designs is
- which switches are doing the routing, and
- which IPs they are allocated.
First things first: you don't need an IP address on every switch in every VLAN. You only need 1 IP per switch for management, and one IP per VLAN on the switch(es) doing routing.
If you require devices on the same VLANs distributed across all switches (e.g. if port 1 on switch-06 and port 3 on switch-04 MUST be on the same VLAN), then the easiest solution is to do all of your routing only on switch-01, and disable routing on the rest. This is also simplest from a configuration point of view. The down side is that for 10.10.2.100 to get to 10.10.3.100, it must go via switch-01, even though it's attached to the same switch. You'll need to decide whether optimal routing or having the devices you've indicated on the same VLANs is most important for you. This will largely depend on the traffic profiles of the different devices, and whatever application requirements dictate. (In this scenario, you also don't need subnet 10.10.1.0/24 anywhere except on switch-01 and the gateway.)
The other option (if you are willing/able to forego devices in different buildings being on the same VLANs) is to use a fully-routed setup, where each switch is the gateway for its local systems and all switches are connected by a VLAN which acts as your routing backbone. In this scenario, you'd need to choose different VLAN numbers and subnets for each switch, e.g. switch-02 might use VLANs 22-23 (and subnets 10.10.22.0/24 and 10.10.23.0/24), switch-03 might use VLANs 32-34, switch-04 might use VLANs 42 and 45, etc. All traffic would be routed optimally and only cross the backbone when it needs to.
If you really must have both optimal routing and VLANs which span buildings, you will need to set up routing on each switch and have the devices attached to it use it as their default gateway, and have both the routing VLAN and all the edge VLANs on the switch-to-switch links. This will get confusing for anyone who comes along, and you'll have asymmetric routing, but it should still mostly work.
In the 1st scenario, the only place OSPF or RIP would help you is between switch-01 and the Internet gateway. I would still use dynamic routing in this case simply because it means when you add VLAN 7 you won't have to change your firewall's config.
In the 2nd scenario, OSPF or RIP is a must, because every switch will have at least 3 routes, and most will have more than that. The 3rd scenario is the same, but i would avoid it if at all possible.
Either of the first two scenarios should work well; it's really a decision of what makes most sense in your environment, given:
- how your traffic flows, and
- how easy it is for you and anyone else in your organisation to understand the configuration
I would tend to go for a distributed routing setup (option 1) if it were my network and i had the choice, but would recommend a centralised routing setup (option 2) if requirements dictated it, or if there are not a lot of routing skills on site. Option 3 is not what i would do at all unless forced.
Hope that makes sense.