WS-X6K-SUP1A-2GE with WS-X6K-S2-PFC2

[Alexandre Vasseur]

Hi everyone,

I have an easy question, but I have not been able to find the answer. ^^

I would like to know if i can have redundancy between these Supervisor Engine (on the same chassis) :

WS-X6K-SUP2-2GE & WS-X6K-S2-PFC2

I already know that WS-X6K-SUP2-2GE + WS-F6K-PFC2  =  WS-X6K-S2-PFC2, but i'm not sure if we can have compatibility(redundancy) between these two cards.

Example :

Mod Slot Ports Module-Type Model Sub Status

--- ---- ----- ------------------------- ------------------- --- --------

1 1 2 1000BaseX Supervisor WS-X6K-S2-PFC2 yes standby

2 2 2 1000BaseX Supervisor WS-X6K-SUP2-2GE yes ok

Thanks for your answer !

[Fabienne Stephanoff]

Hello Alexandre,

I have not tested this personally so can't confirm it will work but I did locate an older internal post mentioning it would work.

Fabienne

TAC

[amikat]

Hi,

In my view to support redundancy the pair of supervisors must meet these hardware requirements:

The Supervisor engine, the routing engine and the forwarding engine models MUST be the same on both modules to support redundancy.

As you quite correctly understand the WS-X6K-S2-PFC2 inludes the WS-F6K-PFC2 forwarding engine but the WS-X6K-SUP2-2GE does not include any forwarding engine itself. So unles the WS-F6K-PFC2 is displayed under the "Sub-Module" section (if running native IOS) or the "Sub-Type" section (if running hybrid) of your "show module" command output of the WS-X6K-SUP2-2GE module these Supervisors do not meet the hardware requirements.

I am ignoring the fact that your heading is referring to both the Sup1A and Sup2 while your actual question is about the Sup2 redundancy.

Best regards,

Antonin