B1600 Chassis network question
From: Steph (stephanos_at_lineone.ten)
Date: 10/21/04
- Previous message: Coy Hile: "Re: Ultra 60 question"
- Next in thread: Fredrik Lundholm: "Re: B1600 Chassis network question"
- Reply: Fredrik Lundholm: "Re: B1600 Chassis network question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:23:07 +0100
Hi all,
I've got a question I'm hoping someone might be able to shed some light
onto for me about the B1600 chassis. We're looking at Blades as as a
possibility to replace a raft of Netras and Intel boxes which are taking
up too much space & power.
Basically, in our current network topology, each server has 4 interfaces,
and is in two networks; Each server having a redundant connection
to another switch for the network in case we lose a switch or NIC. This
is all managed using the usual interface failover script.
Onto the question. I understand that the B1600 can support two internal
switches, and that these can operate in a redundant fashion; my question
is whether or not we can run two fully redundant VLANs (for each
network) on those switches and still fully populate the chassis. (I
appreciate this wouldn't help us if we lose a 'NIC' on a blade, but I'm
far more worried about losing a switch)
Putting it another way, are there enough internal 'ports' on the switches
to support more than 8 blades in a dual-homed, redundant configuration?
Apologies if the question sounds confused; but I'm new to blades as a
technology and I've been thinking about this too hard.
Many thanks,
Steph
- Previous message: Coy Hile: "Re: Ultra 60 question"
- Next in thread: Fredrik Lundholm: "Re: B1600 Chassis network question"
- Reply: Fredrik Lundholm: "Re: B1600 Chassis network question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|