[c-nsp] Basic question regarding SUP7-E operation for redundancy purposes using Uplink ports

[Michael Balasko]

I would suggest doing Redundant links out of the ASA to the SUP's. 


Michael Balasko
CCSP,CCNP,MCSE,SCP
Network Specialist II
City of Henderson
240 Water St. 
Henderson, Nv 89015
P:702-267-4337
C:702-373-2730

"Chuck Norris has only one OSI layer - Physical"


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ramses Rios
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:49 AM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Basic question regarding SUP7-E operation for redundancy purposes using Uplink ports

Hi

We are adquiring a new WS-C4507R+E chassis and with 2 new supervisor WS-X45-SUP7-E.
We are planning to mount 4  WS-X4648-RJ45-E modules in this switch to interconnect most of our network components.
There are a pair of ASA55xx that we want to connect via SFP directly in our supervisor card to use those ports and avoid adding a new fiber module in some of the switch slots.

The interconnection will be: ASA_A --> supervisor_1 & ASA_B --> supervisor_2.

My doubt  is because i believe that in SUP6-E seems one card works online and the other standby.
I don't know if in SUP7-E is the same case and I will not have a fully redundant configuration following that interconection scheme, because if ASA-A fails (connected to SUP7E-1)  and do the switchover to the SUP-7E-2, this card will be offline and, as a result, the network traffic will not pass.

Please share your comments regarding this matter.

thanks!!

Ramsés

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/