Two USW aggregation as ToR?

[RollinLower]

I asked the same question on the Unifi forums but so far i have yet te get a reply there.
Back to the trusty old LTT forums it is then.

 

Currently i have the following setup:
- Unifi UDM Pro

- USW aggregation

- 10G fiber links to my servers/PCs

 

I want to add another USW aggregation so i can have more redundancy in my setup. That would look somewhat like this:

 

All links would still be 10G Multimode fiber.

Now i want to use LAG on the servers, but that would require me to set a single port on both USW aggregations in aggregation mode. All i could find online is aggregation between two switches, where you set 2 ports on each switch in aggregation mode. Not setting 1 port in aggregation mode on each switch, with the other end of the LAG being a client device (server).

 

Within the limits you get with Unifi, is this setup possible? I would really rather know before i spend a bunch of money on a second switch.

thanks in advance!

[Lurick]

That is not possible in Unifi

You need MCLAG which they don't support afaik

[RollinLower]

6 minutes ago, Lurick said:

That is not possible in Unifi

You need MCLAG which they don't support afaik

bummer, explains why i couldn't find anything about it.

 

Guess i'll be shopping for new SFP+ switches then. Even more sad given the USW agg. are perfect for my usecase with anything else. 30W power consumption, just enough SFP ports...

[RollinLower]

one last thing i've been thinking off is just foregoing the MCLAG setup and having two seperate vlans that in turn give the servers network redundancy through just two completely different vlans to link to.

with both 10G links to the switches being protected ports in the UDM Pro, so they can never talk to eachother.

 

obviously this is not as nice as a MCLAG setup, but it would allow me to keep the Unifi equipment i already spent money on and i would be able to somewhat reach my goal of redundant uplinks to my servers. 

 

still looking into the feasability of this, it might not work at all either. And i did also see some Mikrotik switches capable of MCLAG that looked rather nice.

 

[Bdavis]

Do you have issues with your current setup? Are you running something mission critical to need network redundancy? 10 gig is overkill in most home networks situations, redundant 10 gig at home seems excessive.

[RollinLower]

2 hours ago, Bdavis said:

Do you have issues with your current setup? Are you running something mission critical to need network redundancy? 10 gig is overkill in most home networks situations, redundant 10 gig at home seems excessive.

Do any of us really need PCs with 4090s?

Sometimes you just want to tinker with tech. 

[Bdavis]

12 hours ago, RollinLower said:

Do any of us really need PCs with 4090s?

Sometimes you just want to tinker with tech. 

That's fine, I just wanted to make sure there wasn't a specific issue you were trying to solve.

[RollinLower]

7 minutes ago, Bdavis said:

That's fine, I just wanted to make sure there wasn't a specific issue you were trying to solve.

nope, not specifically. though mclag would have been a big plus just from a homelab standpoint. 

i'm gonna dig in a little deeper to see what else i can think up network wise with this US aggregation setup, and if all else fails, i guess i'll have to reinvest in switches which support it.

 

[RollinLower]

i've found a solution with port isolation that would allow me to use the USW aggregation switches, here's a quick sketch:
 

Colors represent links, but no longer specific VLANs or whatever. All just the same subnet. 
X's mean isolated ports, which drop traffic to other isolated ports. All non-isolated ports can still forward traffic to all ports, be them isolated or non-isolated.

 

This way i can have my redundancy and keep the Unify setup, since both routes from the UDM can reach both aggregate switches, but the interconnect between the aggregate switches cannot loop due to the isolated ports. just like the links to the UDM, both switches can reach it individually but one switch cannot talk to the other through the UDM. (But they can talk to eachother over the interconnect!)

 

i even went so far as to already implement this, and it works like a charm!