Network Design: Daisy Chaining vs One Centralized Switch

Question

I am curious as to what the "standard" is when it comes to designing a network with the given constraints:\

1. cable runs would be more than what cat5e/6 would allow without a repeater\
2. one property, multiple buildings with a switch in different buildings, 6 total
3. one firewall, with up to 7 interfaces

I believe it makes sense to use a layer 3 switch or router and have each layer 2 switch running to it, then from the layer 3 switch into the firewall.
It also makes sense to daisy chain each switch together as an uplink then also use one interface on the firewall.
Obvious Constraints:\

1. if you use a l3 switch, you have a single point of failure
2. if you daisy chain, you have failures that could be as bad depending on the l2 switch that fails\

Are any of these standard practice? If not, what is the standard/best way to do it?

Answer 1

Network Design 101. There are 3 general concepts, but no "standard". They all have their own set of pluses and minuses. There are too many questions left unanswered (I suspect, unasked) to point to one over the others.

• Tree
• Hub and Spoke ("star")
• Ring

A "chain" is just an open ring. And "one central switch" could either be a tree, or a "star". Either construct is easily broken by a single link or switch failing - the star having one massive point of failure at the center. Spanning-tree limits the size of a network to 7 hops; doing everything at layer-3 trades STP for a routing protocol.

No matter how you build your network, plan ahead for device(s) and link(s) failing... because at some point they will. (lightning, backhoes, squirrels,... stuff happens.)