We help IT Professionals succeed at work.

Cisco 2950T - Perfect configuration?

Alcedema asked
Last Modified: 2010-05-18
I know this is a bit ambiguous but I hope someone can steer me in the right direction.

The 2950T switch is connected to our provider's switch via the GiB #1 uplink - whenever I have tried to set "Smartports" on that to "Switch" it always dies and I have to reset it to nothing (I don't know why.. their switch is a Cisco too). We have 6 servers connected twice to the switch, in two VLans. One vlan is "global" with the interfaces having public IPs. The other vlan is "internal" for machine to machine traffic (DB, etc) and has class C addresses.

The currently installed software is the 12.1(22)EA9-C2950-I6Q4L2-M version. I think I saw 12.4 was out, but cannot log into the cisco site to get it.

I am not switch-minded. So I don't know the ins and outs regarding "spanning trees" etc, although we will not be adding any more switches to this one and the VLANS will be fully encapsulated on this one switch.

So going back to the point at hand, with the above scenario are there any configuration options I can turn off to save on CPU/memory and allow the switch to perform faster? Or are there any options I can turn on to allow this configuration to perform more securely.

I.e. how would you go about setting up this configuration yourself? Please don't hesitate to ask me anything else about this confguration.

Watch Question

One of the cardinal sins of computing is over-optimization. You'll make things more complicated trying to do something fancy when you don't need to.
Do you NEED to get the switch to go faster? Is it running out of CPU or memory, or are you maxing out the network interfaces?


One of the benefits of buying expensive Cisco hardware, they generally support full utilization of the hardware.  What I mean is, if they have a switch with 24 ports, then the backplane, cpu and memory will support full utilization of all 24 ports.  Another example, on a 24 port switch you can usually do up to 12 port groups.  I wouldn't worry about optimization, except in the case of doing QOS for voice traffic, if you plan on doing VOIP.

When you do the "smartports" macro, you are really just applying a canned config.  You have to know what that canned config is doing to know why you would lose connectivity to the other end.  For instance, if the macro happens to set the port as an access port, and specifies a VLAN, if the switch on the other end isn't in that same VLAN, it would appear to be dead.

It seems to me that maybe there is something wrong with the macro you have created. Can we see a sanitized version of the config?

More to jjeff1's point, Alcedema, what are you using smartports for?? Smarports should be used for deployment/upkeep of several routers/switches.... not for just one.


I tried the Smartports simply because the Network Assistant from Cisco kept bugging me about setting it. Reading up on it, says that it should optimise the connection between both switches and seeing as they were both Cisco and the Assistant seemed to think it would be ok, I tried it.

I asked the initial question because at the time and for a while, pings to the switch were in excess of 500-600ms, whilst pings from the machines behind the switch were 10-20ms. I have since rectified (mostly) that problem as it was excessive network ARP traffic from different users on the same network.

I'm not trying to over-optimise, just trying to optimise if it needs it. I do not know if the switch was enabled to cover all the bases off-the-shelf, in which case it may help to turn a few things off if I wasn't going to be needing them.

One option I have seen is the port security where the port will shut down if a new server was connected which I would use on VLAN #2 (internal one).

Are there any other options which could help my cause, or any that won't be needed and can be turned off. I suppose I am thinking in terms of a linux kernel. Off the shelf it's cluttered, so we refine and create our own with our own options. If that's not the case with switches, then I most certainly assumed incorrectly.
This one is on us!
(Get your first solution completely free - no credit card required)
Unlock the solution to this question.
Join our community and discover your potential

Experts Exchange is the only place where you can interact directly with leading experts in the technology field. Become a member today and access the collective knowledge of thousands of technology experts.

*This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.


Please enter a first name

Please enter a last name

8+ characters (letters, numbers, and a symbol)

By clicking, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.