Forum Discussion
jfrizzell_43066
Nimbostratus
Jan 18, 2012LTM Connection to Dual Switches
Hello Everyone,
I am hoping that someone can help me understand which connection type is best for F5. We currently have two F5's in an active/failover cluster. In our environment, we are going away from access ports with single HTTP/HTTPS VIP to multiple VLANs. As part of this setup, I have done the following:
- Created 4 VLANs
- Created Self-IPs on each unit, plus one Floating IP
The current network setup is displayed in the attached Diagram-1, which has LTM-01 and LTM-02 split between multiple switches. Here is what I have done to test the new VLAN setup. On both switches, I have set the ports connecting to 1.4 on both LTM to down. I created trunk ports on both switches connecting to ports1.3. I was successful in reaching the self-IPs and the HTTP/HTTPS VIPs.
Is it preferable to leave the LTM ports as connected in Diagram-1 and change the access ports to trunk ports? Doing so would leave me with 4 trunk ports.
OR
Should I re-cable according to Diagram-2 and configure the switch with port channels?
I am just looking for the best performance and redundancy. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Jeremy
- Techgeeeg
Nimbostratus
Hi Jeremy, - mikand_61525
Nimbostratus
Cant you change when the HA will fail then? - Nathan_Houck_65
Nimbostratus
I believe Diagram two looks like it should suffice, but make sure you use Vlan Failover so the bigips will failover if the switch its connected to goes down. - hoolio
Cirrostratus
I'd suggest HA groups over VLAN failsafe as the former provides faster failover and more intelligence to prevent failover loops if both units experience the same failsafe event. - Techgeeeg
Nimbostratus
Mikand I really want to understand the scenario you are explaining here can you make it more detailed as I really didn't get your reply completely..... - mikand_61525
Nimbostratus
Techgeeeg: I think hoolio just explained that. - Techgeeeg
Nimbostratus
Thanks Mikand I got it now... but this setup seems like a work around solution and I feel like you have to un necessarily setup alot of thing in the shape of monitors to achieve the working setup in all situations. Also in case if there is any problem with server 2 and server 1 is very much fine health wise then failing of switch one along with server2 will leave the setup no where.... so what do you think now diagram 1 is a better design or diagram 2 should be followed????? - jfrizzell_43066
Nimbostratus
Thanks for all the feedback so far on this topic. To give you an idea of our failover, we use serial and LAN. I can remove the serial and use the LAN if that seems best. - mikand_61525
Nimbostratus
Techgeeeg: Unfortunately I cant open your drawings here - is it possible for you to publish them on bayimg.com or similar (and post links)? - Techgeeeg
Nimbostratus
Well mikand i prefer you better have a look at both of the diagrams. Then i believe you reply will be more acurate and i would love to understand you point behind diagram 2 as a better option over option1. The query basically came from mikand and i am refering to the diagrams attached here nothing else .... and i believe you can open the two diagrams....
Recent Discussions
Related Content
Â
DevCentral Quicklinks
* Getting Started on DevCentral
* Community Guidelines
* Community Terms of Use / EULA
* Community Ranking Explained
* Community Resources
* Contact the DevCentral Team
* Update MFA on account.f5.com
Discover DevCentral Connects