60C Link Aggregation

Find out whether 60C supports redundant interfaces or not . If it does then you can combine two interfaces into one for each zone and then have a full mesh setup.

Find out whether 60C supports redundant interfaces or not . If it does then you can combine two interfaces into one for each zone and then have a full mesh setup.

It does not, the 200B is the first model, read my post above.

Selective, Austin.M -- thanks guys -- we' ve just received our pair of 60Cs. So I' m digging around into that right now. I' ll post my results to help with others in the future.

Link aggregation and redundant interfaces are 2 unique features or issues. Also I recall link aggregation ( 802.3ad ) being support in models as early as the 100A and even 800A back in the day, so I' m not sure of what you meant by; The 200B is the first model to support Link Aggregation. 100D does not.

emnoc: i mean, the 110C, 100D, 100A, 80C, 60C, 50B, 40C and 20C does not support these features, and i know in much older firmwares they could have been supported but not in newer firmwares.

The reason for this is that in v4.00 LACP is handled by the NP. Smaller FGTs do not have NPs. It might be that in v3.00 LACP was done by the CPU but that would cost a lot of power for GbE interfaces and so was abandoned.

Hi guys, Well we got our 60Cs in and I' ve been experimenting with the possible configurations here. I can say these things for a fact, the 60c definitely does not support link aggregation and also does not support interface redundancy. Selective, I think the solution that leaves for me is doing like you' ve suggested and using 2 switch ports.. did you do that by configuring creating a new interface of type " software switch" ?

Yep, one alternative seems to be to use a software switch, which is available in the 60C. You can create a software switch from " Network" ->" Interface" ->" Create New Interface" , then: Type: Software Switch And select the interface ports desired (e.g. I used internal1 and internal2). I first set my " Switch Mode" into " Interface Mode" to let me have access to internal1-5 and created a LAN switch. You can set a single IP address for the switch, e.g. 192.168.0.5 I ran some tests by running 2 network cables, one from internal1, and another from internal2 out to a switch with a test PC. I setup a constant ping from that test PC back to the 60C 192.168.0.5 address, and then tried unplugging internal1 and then internal2. I found that generally this did work and access to the device would recover.. but it would noticeably take a few seconds (e.g. 5-10) for ping to resume after switching the cables. I assume this is just due to normal switching. So this seems to work, but it' s definitely not as good as a real redundant or aggregate interface. Please let me know if anyone has any knowledge of if using a software switch like this could cause any issues?

My setup was a little different, as i do not want to do software switch, beacuse it will run on the CPU. My setup: 2 FortiGate 110C 2 Procurve switches 2810 from each fortigate (the switch interface), connect two cables, one to each switch. configure spanning-tree on the switches (i went with rapid spanning tree) Then cross-connect the two switches with each other.

Definitely... but that doesn' t quite answer the bit about how the fortigate handles the two interface connections internally, which was my big problem... I wanted to combine those two connections using aggregation, or interface redundancy, or something. I wanted a single IP across 2 connections, and each of those connections to a separate switch. Essentially I' ve concluded that I agree with you I' d prefer not to use a software switch.. and so I' m going to do what is the only other option available to me since the 60C doesn' t support aggregation and " full mesh" ... meaning I' ll hook 60-C #1 up to switch #1... and 60-C #2 to switch #2... cross-connect switch 1 to switch 2... and just use fail-over monitoring so that if switch #1 died, then I' d fail-over to 60-C #2, which is setup on switch #2. Not as good as a full mesh, because my setup wouldn' t be resilient against the unlikely scenario of 60-c #1 and switch #1 both dying at the same time.. but still pretty good.