Replacing Cisco CBS350X Stack with 2x FortiSwitch 448E

[fabs]

Hi everyone,

I'm currently working with the following setup:

• We have a FortiGate 100F

• Port X1 on the FortiGate connects via 10G to a stack of 2x Cisco CBS350X (on the Ground Floor).

• From there, there's an uplink via 10G to another stack of 2x Cisco CBS350X (on the Upper Floor).
  The reason for using the stack is to expand port availability, not for redundancy.

Now, I want to replace the Cisco stack on the Ground Floor with 2x FortiSwitch 448E but leave the stack in the Upper floor.

What would be the most sensible and correct way here?
Can the 448E also be operated in a stack?
Does it make sense to connect X1 and X2 to a 448E each? And to connect both 448E to the respective CBS350X on the upper floor?

Thanks in advance for your help!

[AEK]

Hi Fabs

FS-448E supports MCLAG. You can integrate X1 and X2 in an active-active FortiLink on FGT, and connect them to your FortiSwitches.

Something like this would be fine.

[fabs]

Hi @AEK 

Thank you very much for your reply and the diagram you drew.
I have another question regarding the (MCLAG) between the two 448E Switches.

My idea for the cabling would be as follows:

Fortigate 100F X1 -> 448E #1 Port 49 (10G SFP)
Fortigate 100F X2 -> 448E #2 Port 49 (10G SFP)

MCLAG:
448E #1 Port 51/Port 52 (10G SFP) -> 448E #2 Port 51/Port52 (10G SFP)

Uplink LCAP to Upper Floor CBS350 stacked
448E #1 Port 50 (10G SFP) -> CBS350 #1 XG1(10G SFP)
448E #2 Port 50 (10G SFP) -> CBS350 #2 XG1 (10G SFP)

However, this presents the issue that all 10G ports on both 448E are in use.
I require at least one additional 10G port on one of the 448E for another switch in a different part of the building.
So the question is, does the MCLAG have to need of 2x 10G, or would 1x 10G be sufficient?

In addition, I am planning to replace the two CBS350 stacked on the upper floor with also 2x 448E at the end of the year. What would be the sensible cabling solution here?

Thanks,

fabs

[AEK]

Hi Fabs

Yes you can use one single link to inter-connect the two FSW. Two is good for redundancy but 1 will work fine.

If you replace the Cisco switches by FSW then you can keep the same design as shown above if tired architecture is needed.

You can also check the Fortinet switching architecture guide.

https://docs.fortinet.com/document/fortiswitch/7.4.0/switching-reference-architecture-guide/383494/i...

Hope it helps.