Watch and learn how ATEN provided a total control system solution including seamless switching matrix switch, HDBaseT extenders, PDU, lighting control to build an interactive eFuture classroom.
Course Of The Month
Become a Premium Member and unlock a new, free course in leading technologies each month.
Solved
Standard network Setup
Posted on 2014-12-23
I am in the process of restructuring our network infrastructure with the new design . what is the best standard approach to have redundancy in mind
10 story building with 3 columns . Our IT room located in the 4th floor and having two manage high end switches in the core level . second one is not live but it has the same configuration . most of the floor are having fiber single core ones . one of my friend told me to go with 2 or 4 core to have redundant . I did not understand the redundancy with one cable with 2 0r 4 core one will help .I got to know is batter to have two cables fiber connection to each floor and then distribute within the floor .
please advice me on the best practice on the above implementation .
10 story building with 3 columns . Our IT room located in the 4th floor and having two manage high end switches in the core level . second one is not live but it has the same configuration . most of the floor are having fiber single core ones . one of my friend told me to go with 2 or 4 core to have redundant . I did not understand the redundancy with one cable with 2 0r 4 core one will help .I got to know is batter to have two cables fiber connection to each floor and then distribute within the floor .
please advice me on the best practice on the above implementation .
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange
Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.
- Help others & share knowledge
- Earn cash & points
- Learn & ask questions
2
3 Comments
First, define "redundancy" in the context of what you intend to accomplish.
Here is an example of what I would call "full redundancy":
"Separate switches and routers and firewall throughout. Separate cable runs in different physical locations in the building backbone. Two internet connections which arrive using different physical mechanisms and through different physical routes from two different ISPs."
This would be for one site/building.
Then you could consider having a separate site for backing up the whole thing.
Given this, you could back off from some of it if it seems to make sense to you. Only you can decide what makes sense for your situation. What kinds of failures, threats and vulnerabilities are you wanting to address?
Example in your case:
Using more than a single fiber for intra-site communications would make sense if the concern is failed switch ports, failed switches, etc. This implies that those added switch capabilities are also present.
Using more than a single fiber with the fiber runs in different physical locations for intra-site communications would make sense if physical damage to the runs is the concern. In this case, the redundant switches might also be in separate locations.
If you eliminate physical damage as a likely vulnerability (e.g. a localized fire or a fully-involved building fire), then you get back to failed electronics and failed internet service pretty much.
Here is an example of what I would call "full redundancy":
"Separate switches and routers and firewall throughout. Separate cable runs in different physical locations in the building backbone. Two internet connections which arrive using different physical mechanisms and through different physical routes from two different ISPs."
This would be for one site/building.
Then you could consider having a separate site for backing up the whole thing.
Given this, you could back off from some of it if it seems to make sense to you. Only you can decide what makes sense for your situation. What kinds of failures, threats and vulnerabilities are you wanting to address?
Example in your case:
Using more than a single fiber for intra-site communications would make sense if the concern is failed switch ports, failed switches, etc. This implies that those added switch capabilities are also present.
Using more than a single fiber with the fiber runs in different physical locations for intra-site communications would make sense if physical damage to the runs is the concern. In this case, the redundant switches might also be in separate locations.
If you eliminate physical damage as a likely vulnerability (e.g. a localized fire or a fully-involved building fire), then you get back to failed electronics and failed internet service pretty much.
Featured Post
Question has a verified solution.
If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question
If you’re like me and you like peace and quiet, saving money, and pretty lights, then this article is for you.
For financial reasons, I buy all the Cisco equipment for my home lab second-hand. The first thing to wear out is usually one of the coo…
When posting a question about a Cisco ASA, Cisco Router or Cisco Switch, it can aid diagnosis if a suitably sanitised copy of the config is provided. It is much better to leave as much of the configuration as original as possible, as it could be tha…
Michael from AdRem Software explains how to view the most utilized and worst performing nodes in your network, by accessing the Top Charts view in NetCrunch network monitor (https://www.adremsoft.com/). Top Charts is a view in which you can set seve…
This is my first video review of Microsoft Bookings, I will be doing a part two with a bit more information, but wanted to get this out to you folks.
Suggested Courses
Earn Certification
HTML5 Specialist - Certification
Free withPremium
Course of the Month4 days, 13 hours left to enroll
636 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.
Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.