Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add stacking interfaces for stackable switches #326

Closed
sschwetz opened this issue Jul 19, 2016 · 12 comments
Closed

Add stacking interfaces for stackable switches #326

sschwetz opened this issue Jul 19, 2016 · 12 comments
Labels
status: duplicate This issue has already been raised

Comments

@sschwetz
Copy link

Is it possible to add a switchport type of "stacking" to allow network diagrams etc to show when switches are stacked in the topography. I have currently just added the module ports as network ports, and linked them as 1gb ethernet, but they are really stacking cables. It all works, it just doesn't site nice with my OCD ;-)

I have to do it this way, as the stacked switches are in separate racks.

@jeremystretch jeremystretch added the type: feature Introduction of new functionality to the application label Jul 19, 2016
@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

What type of cabling/port do these use? E.g. what should we call it in the list of interface types?

@ryanmerolle
Copy link
Contributor

Cisco calls them StackWise & StackWise Plus ports. Juniper calls them Virtual Chassis Ports.

Looking through IOS devices that are stacked, I see no special port labels, just switch status and # of the member in the stack. I am pretty sure only stack cable ports can be used here.

In JUNOS I see port labeling like vcp-1/3/0. With some JUNOS platforms a special VC port can be used or any regular port can be used.

@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

Is it worth enumerating the various types of proprietary stacking interfaces? Should we just define a "stacking" or "virtual chassis" interface type?

@cstueckrath
Copy link

IBM/Lenovo Bladecenter switches are usually stacked by a bonded 2x 10G DAC-Cable or SFP+

@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

Similarly, Juniper EX4300s use normal QSFP+ interfaces. In those cases I'd suggest people just use the existing interface types.

@ryanmerolle
Copy link
Contributor

Yea I would agree with @jeremystretch.

Would a custom port attribute help to identify it as a stack/VC port? This could be addressed by custom fields #129. If it was not a custom attribute, then it would be more obvious to users and prevent these future requests, but a field would meet this need to identify this special port.

@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

Would a custom port attribute help to identify it as a stack/VC port?

We need to define at least one interface type to cover the proprietary types. It could be a generic "Stacking" type (similar to the existing "Virtual" type) or we could create one for each physical specifiction (e.g. "Cisco StackWise," "Cisco StackWise Plus," etc.).

@ryanmerolle
Copy link
Contributor

ryanmerolle commented Jul 19, 2016

@jeremystretch That'e fine with me. I did not figure you wanted to support that given potential creep towards cluster/stack support requests on the nodes/devices themselves.

Can you also add a POE type also?

@sschwetz
Copy link
Author

On HP Procurves they are called "Stacking Ports" and they are modules in seperate cards.
HP Comware they are bonded SPF+ or QSPF+ Ports

@jeremystretch jeremystretch changed the title Add Stacking Cables for Stackable Switches Add stacking interfaces for stackable switches Jul 20, 2016
@peelman
Copy link
Contributor

peelman commented Jul 22, 2016

duplicate of #99

@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

This is just for adding one or more new interface form factors for "stacking" ports. #99 deals with treating multiple devices as a single logical entity.

@jeremystretch
Copy link
Member

Folding this into #167 as part of a larger initiative to add more interface form factors.

@jeremystretch jeremystretch added status: duplicate This issue has already been raised and removed type: feature Introduction of new functionality to the application labels Jul 28, 2016
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 19, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
status: duplicate This issue has already been raised
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants