[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::fddi

Title:FDDI - The Next Generation
Moderator:NETCAD::STEFANI
Created:Thu Apr 27 1989
Last Modified:Thu Jun 05 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:2259
Total number of notes:8590

1445.0. "FDX and dual homing ?" by VNABRW::HAINZL_R () Fri Sep 16 1994 07:59

    I have a simple question on FDX-FDDI and Dual-Homing
    
    Is it possible to run FDX across dual-homed FDDi-links ?
    
    planned configuration:
    
           ------------                           ------------
           |          |                           |          |
           | GigaSw.  |                           | Gigasw.  |
    	   |          |---------------------------|          |
    	   |	      |---------------------------|          |
    	   ------------   one ore more FDX links  ------------
              ||   ||                               ||    ||
    	      ||   |---------------------\          ||    ||
              ||   -----------------\     \         ||    ||
    	      ||  -----------------------------------|    ||
              ||  |-----------------------------------    ||
              ||  ||           	      \	    \		  ||
              ||  ||                   \     --------|    ||
              ||  ||                    ------------||    ||
            ----------                             ----------
    	    |        |                             |        |
            |2100A500|                             |2100A500|
    	    |        |                             |        |
    	    ----------                             ----------
    
    		2 FDDI/PCI (DAS) Controllers per Alpha
    		both FDDI-controllers  dual homed to both Gigaswitches 
    		
    ? is it possible to run the DAS interfaces with dual-homing and 
      FDX (of course one link for every FDDI-interface will go into 
      backup mode) ??
    
    thanks in advance, Richard
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1445.1koning.lkg.dec.com::koningPaul Koning, B-16504Fri Sep 16 1994 11:289
Yes.

Full duplex is possible whenever there are exactly TWO MACs on the ring.
It doesn't matter what else there is; in particular it doesn't matter how
the ring is put together.  So if you have a dual homed setup connecting
between a Gigaswitch line card and a DAS adapter, you have two MACs at all
times, and full duplex should work.

	paul
1445.2retry: dual-homing and full-duplexMUDDY::WATERSMon Sep 19 1994 11:2015
>    <<< Note 1445.1 by koning.lkg.dec.com::koning "Paul Koning, B-16504" >>>
>Yes.
>Full duplex is possible whenever there are exactly TWO MACs on the ring.

    Another answer: Maybe.
    You didn't specify what kind of GIGAswitch ports you are using.

    If you connect one DAS host to two SAS GIGAswitch ports, you have
    a 3-station ring with *three* MACs.

    If you connect two DAS hosts to two DAS GIGAswitch ports, and swap
    cables so that each DAS host talks to both of the DAS switch ports,
    I'm not sure what you have.  (An illegal topology?)

    Paul, please explain in what case your answer applies.
1445.3DAS across GIGAswitch M ports?CHEFS::PADDICKMichael Paddick - BRS Bristol, UKThu May 22 1997 06:437
    If a DAS device is connected between two GIGAswitches with SAS ports
    configured for type M, will the 'live' leg run as FDX?
    
    The two GIGAswitches are inter-connected via another SAS port, so are
    part of the same 'network'.
    
    Meic.
1445.4ask the Gigaswitch folksNETCAD::ROLKEThe FDDI Genome ProjectThu May 22 1997 10:2013
Hi,

Paul's answer in .1 applies.  For any random DAS device which wants to
run Full Duplex the key metrics are that the "ring" has only two MACs
and that the peer whats to run Full Duplex, too.

Please see SCHOOL::GIGASWITCH note 491.  This has a picture of what
you describe.  I believe that Gigaswitch is very clever and can run
several Full Duplex links at once.  How it does this is built in to
Gigaswitch software.  I suggest that this question is best answered
there.

Chuck
1445.5AMCFAC::RABAHYdtn 471-5160, outside 1-810-347-5160Thu May 22 1997 10:2323
re .3:

>If a DAS device is connected between two GIGAswitches with SAS ports
>configured for type M, will the 'live' leg run as FDX?

Maybe.  For FGL-4 ports in the right slots you will get full duplex.  For FGL-2
ports in any slot you will get full duplex only if the other port of a pair is
not active.

	M-AB-M		the B-M link is active and can do full duplex, if the
			B-M link fails the M-A link becomes active and it too
			can do full duplex

	S-AB-S		is a wrapped ring and cannot do full duplex until one of
			the S ports goes offline, naturally if the DAS goes down 
			the two S ports won't be able to see each other

	A-B		is a ring with two stations and will do full duplex,
	B-A		this remains true when a link fails and the ring wraps

	A-BA-B		is a ring with three stations and cannot do full duplex
	B----A		well, if a station leaves the ring it'll wrap and go
			into full duplex
1445.6NPSS::MDLYONSMichael D. Lyons DTN 226-6943Thu May 22 1997 11:0217
    ...as Dennis says, in the case where you make a GIGAswitch/FDDI DAS
    port (FGL-2 configured with two PMDs in the port) into a port with two
    M ports, you will get full duplex if only one MAC attached to those M
    ports is active...  
    
    I.E. The MAC for a "A" port in standby is not visible to the M port, so
    if you have an active "B" port connected to one of the M ports, and a
    standby "A" port connected to the other, during normal operation FFDT
    is operating to the "B" connected port.  If the A port becomes active,
    the port drops out of FFDT due to the presence of the third MAC.
    
        SAS ports converted to M ports will always allow FFDT operation
    since there is only one MAC at the other end.  ...if, of course,  the
    other end allows it, and the GIGAswitch/FDDI port hasn't had FFDT
    disabled.
    
    MDL
1445.7NPSS::MDLYONSMichael D. Lyons DTN 226-6943Thu May 22 1997 11:054
       ...incidently, in the previous replies, .1 is correct, and .2 isn't,
    for the reasons I mentioned in .6
    
    MDL