Creating a duplicate path between two switches adds unnecessary traffic and complexity.
Creating a duplicate path between two switches adds unnecessary traffic and complexity.
Hi hive mind, I'm setting up a small network for continuous tasks. I have devices at location A and B, but instead of a single connection between them, I want at least two separate paths for redundancy. If the main link fails, the backup routes should handle it. From what I understand, I need to run the spanning tree protocol and ensure both switches use compatible STP versions, designating one as the master while others recognize it. Is this approach accurate? Thanks ahead.
Yes, if these are managed switches you might also set up Link Aggregation to maintain a link even if one fails. Alternatively, you can configure fail-over settings so that when a port goes down, another automatically takes its place. These options usually don't depend on STP, but you could simply connect the ports.
Thanks for the feedback. I hadn't considered applying Link Aggregation in failover mode; it appears to be a more effective approach for addressing the issue.