Cisco Access Layer redundancy

I am looking for some recommendation / design advise on establishing redundancy for 2 new switches in the access layer.
I currently have two 6509e switches in the core/dist layer.
These two switches are connected via a port channel trunk

I now have 2 new  6509e switches that are going to be used as the access layer for all the user workstations.
I am looking to breakup the user environment over several different vlans.
What are some ways or what is the best way to accomplish redundancy in the case of failure to one of the Core/dist switches?
I will obviously connect to both of the core/dist from each access switch but wondering if I should consider Layer3 LAG to the core via portchannel.  Will this eliminate having to use Spanning tree for failover if I go with Layer 2 trunks to the core/dist?

I appreciate any advise/insight into a good solution.
Who is Participating?
John MeggersNetwork ArchitectCommented:
Depending on the size of the network, spanning tree can have problems, but if you're only taking about four switches, I wouldn't expect that to be a problem.  Most times when I work with customers who are doing L3 up to the core, it's because they have so many VLANs and so many switches that it's better to keep it limited to the access layer.  But in your network, I would probably just trunk to the core.  There's no "one way" to do it, and there's a lot of good information in Cisco's design guides.
HSRP should do for the failover.

The client PC's should have their default gateway set at the HSRP Ip address rather than the actual switch/vlan IP.

The access layer switches also in turn should be pointing to the HSRP Ip's of the 2 existing core switches you are having.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.