Forum Discussion

Tiaan_92076's avatar
Tiaan_92076
Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
Apr 19, 2009

Link Redundancy on Cisco Switches

Hallo,

 

 

I need to connect a Big-IP device to two physical switches for redundancy. I don’t want the Big-IP to take part in the spanning tree, one of the reasons being the Cisco’s are using the PVST protocol. The Cisco’s are not clustered therefore EtherChannel will not work across the two switches. The Big-IP will also be doing VLAN Tagging on these links.

 

 

I need the Big-IP to be on standard access ports and not be a bridge.

 

 

I’m not able to find any documentation on how to set this up, any help would be appreciated.

 

 

Diagram attached.

 

 

Thanks

 

Tiaan
config
design

3 Replies

Sort By
  • Tiaan_92076's avatar
    Tiaan_92076
    Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
    Apr 20, 2009
    Hallo,

     

     

    We tested the following and it seems to be working correctly.

     

     

    Spanning tree was disabled on the Big-IP. A trunk containing the two ports was created without LACP configured. VLANs was then created with the VLAN tag number configured on the trunk interface as tagged. Self IPs was added to the VLANs created above.

     

     

    The Cisco ports was left as access ports with VLAN tagging.

     

     

    Am I correct in saying the Big-IP will not be a bridge in the above configuration ?

     

     

    Thanks

     

    Tiaan

     

  • x86brandon_9930's avatar
    x86brandon_9930
    Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
    Nov 12, 2009
    If you have the port density on the BIG-IP, you could use access ports/port based VLAN's on untagged interfaces tied to specific VLAN's on the F5.
    • satish_txt_2254's avatar
      satish_txt_2254
      Icon for Cirrus rankCirrus
      Apr 27, 2017

      I am having same problem. My secondary link is going in loopguard and never recover