<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic IMS Redundant Switch Question in Intel® Xeon® Processor and Server Products</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Xeon-Processor-and-Server/IMS-Redundant-Switch-Question/m-p/391350#M8553</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm currently in the middle of setting up an Intel Modular Server and I have a question about how the switch redundancy using a second switching module in the system.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there anyway that we can LAG Port 1 from switch 1 to Port 1 from switch 2 or bond any of the switch ports of switch 1 with any of the switch ports of switch 2 (I'm refering to the external switch ports, not the internal ones)? Basicly, instead of just failover, we would like to utilize the speed of both ports while having the redundant features. Is a true standby state the only thing we can do with the second switch?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:56:21 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>idata</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2010-07-09T04:56:21Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>IMS Redundant Switch Question</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Xeon-Processor-and-Server/IMS-Redundant-Switch-Question/m-p/391350#M8553</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm currently in the middle of setting up an Intel Modular Server and I have a question about how the switch redundancy using a second switching module in the system.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there anyway that we can LAG Port 1 from switch 1 to Port 1 from switch 2 or bond any of the switch ports of switch 1 with any of the switch ports of switch 2 (I'm refering to the external switch ports, not the internal ones)? Basicly, instead of just failover, we would like to utilize the speed of both ports while having the redundant features. Is a true standby state the only thing we can do with the second switch?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:56:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Xeon-Processor-and-Server/IMS-Redundant-Switch-Question/m-p/391350#M8553</guid>
      <dc:creator>idata</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-07-09T04:56:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: IMS Redundant Switch Question</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Xeon-Processor-and-Server/IMS-Redundant-Switch-Question/m-p/391351#M8554</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You can't use 802.1q on the server ports - see &lt;A href="http://www.intel.com/support/motherboards/server/mfsys25/sb/CS-028603.htm"&gt;http://www.intel.com/support/motherboards/server/mfsys25/sb/CS-028603.htm&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 00:12:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Xeon-Processor-and-Server/IMS-Redundant-Switch-Question/m-p/391351#M8554</guid>
      <dc:creator>Daniel_O_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2010-07-13T00:12:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

