Stackling Topology

[dan5]

I'm curious if anyone has tried stacking Meraki switches in a topology that is not a ring?

I've always liked stacking switches in a redundant chain topology like the following.

[alemabrahao]

No and I wouldn't recommend trying it any other way.

[RaphaelL]

Good question. I'm not sure if it is supported. 

Looking at the documentation : https://documentation.meraki.com/MS/Stacking/Switch_Stacks  They only mention a ring topology. 

I do prefer that topology. You don't need longer stack cables.

According to the documentation were you took that photo, it is a ring topology. 

https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/release-independent/information-products/topic-collectio...

A ring topology is more reliable than a chain topology. The failure of one link in a ring does not affect the function of the stack, whereas the failure of one link in a chain connection might cause the stack to be split.

https://www.cisco.com/assets/sol/sb/Switches_Emulators_v2_3_5_xx/help/350_550/index.html#page/tesla_...

[dan5]

You're right, juniper do call this a ring, but I personally call it a redundant chain to delineate between this and style and an actual ring.

I've used this topology with multiple other vendors including Cisco Catalyst, Avaya ERS, Aruba and it works.
But I'm doing a BOM with Meraki right now and I don't know if I can get away with this topology with Meraki and I don't have enough lab kit to test it.

[BlakeRichardson]

If its not mention in the documentation is most likely not supported and therefore won't work. 

[Boomerang94]

I did some digging on this one. So Meraki uses a proprietary protocol using which different members of a stack communicate with each other. Going by the tradition and KB information, it is recommended to use a basic ring topology to connect the stack members. Although based on internal tests even non-ring topology (similar to one you shared in the picture) worked fine as a stack - however - this is not officially support by Meraki and should be used at your own risk.

I hope this answers your question 🙂  

[rhbirkelund]

I'm curious as why do you believe the chain topology is better than a ring topology? In the end you'd be getting the same performance, are you not? If one memeber fails there is still connectivity the other way around. This you'll just be "skipping" a member.

[dan5]

Couple of reasons.

I can build a big stack without needing a long cable that ends up being too long and gets coiled up at the back of the rack.

Also I can can build a single stack that can exist as a top of rack switches spanning multiple racks when the first and last members of the stack would be further then the 5m dac cable will reach. 

[rhbirkelund]

Interesting thought. 🙂

[Boomerang94]

While your reasons are genuine and the desired topology may work practically, it won't be officially supported on the Meraki end and if it comes down to troubleshooting it with a support personnel, they might ask you to revert back to ring topology. Again, as per my earlier answer, you will have to deploy it at your own risk 🙂  

[BlakeRichardson]

I get you not wanting to have excess cable however how often in any rack do you find the exact length cable unless you custom make your patch leads and power cords.

The question would be how often are you working in your racks that having a coiled up cable becomes an issue or is it simply and aesthetics thing?