On 05/23/2012 12:05 AM, ryanL wrote:
on a similar note, how do people address the situation of a server
doing bond0 to two different top of rack switches, and a switch uplink
fails? in this situation, the two tor switches are not connected (i
dislike spanning tree). the bond0 interface can't see
If you are looking at various vendors there are others in the space
that offer high density 10GbE solutions at very competitive price
points (e.g. Arista) you should investigate.
-mark
On May 23, 2012, at 1:32 AM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:38:56 PM Mick
On Sunday, May 20, 2012 07:57:41 AM Reuben Farrelly wrote:
It's also nice to be able to go from 1G to 10G by just
upgrading SFP's.
That's why we're looking at the 4500-X (Cisco) and EX4500
(Juniper), and ignoring the typical core switch devices like
the 6500, Nexus 7000 (Cisco) and EX8200,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 16:00:09, Mark Tinka wrote:
Cc: scott owens
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
On Sunday, May 20, 2012 07:57:41 AM Reuben Farrelly wrote:
It's also nice to be able to go from 1G to 10G by just upgrading
SFP's.
That's why we're looking
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:19:47 PM Ryan West wrote:
And you'll have VSS in the X. I realize the 5500 and
4500-X are positioned differently, but the 10G capacity
of the 4500-X does seem a little low for the price. I
guess it all depends on the feature set you need. What
are you needing
Hi,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:42:20PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
For the price (or for what the price will be), the 4500-X
fits our bill quite nicely in both segments we're looking
at.
What sort of hardware is inside the 4500-X?
Pure L2, 3750-ish L3, or 6500-ish L3 (with Netflow, full
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:51:15 PM Gert Doering wrote:
Pure L2, 3750-ish L3, or 6500-ish L3 (with Netflow,
full tables, MPLS)?
Well, it supports hardware-based IPv4 (256,000 entries max.)
and IPv6 (128,000 entries max.). It will also do Multicast
in hardware (32,000 both for IPv4 and
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 16:42:20, Mark Tinka wrote:
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:19:47 PM Ryan West wrote:
And you'll have VSS in the X. I realize the 5500 and 4500-X are
positioned differently, but the 10G capacity of the 4500-X does
Thus spake Gert Doering (g...@greenie.muc.de) on Tue, May 22, 2012 at
10:51:15PM +0200:
Hi,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:42:20PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
For the price (or for what the price will be), the 4500-X
fits our bill quite nicely in both segments we're looking
at.
What sort
The X = a Sup7 in a box.
55k MAC. 128k ACL.
60 odd etherchannels and vrfs. Same same.
There was a nice thread with detail from the Cisco product manager here on
it a while back.
On May 23, 2012 7:04 AM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:51:15 PM Gert Doering
on a similar note, how do people address the situation of a server
doing bond0 to two different top of rack switches, and a switch uplink
fails? in this situation, the two tor switches are not connected (i
dislike spanning tree). the bond0 interface can't see that uplink
failure, and would
i've played with the eem stuff on 4948's, which kinda worked well.
On some models you can use link state tracking...which feels a bit
less kludgy to me than EEM. The ports just have to be configured as
upstream or downstream. It's not supported on the 6500 or N5K though
unfortunately.
Oliver
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:38:56 PM Mick O'Rourke wrote:
The X = a Sup7 in a box.
55k MAC. 128k ACL.
60 odd etherchannels and vrfs. Same same.
There was a nice thread with detail from the Cisco
product manager here on it a while back.
And the 1U form-factor is great. Like Gert, we
On (2012-05-20 21:35 -0500), Tony Varriale wrote:
Maybe your set of features configured in your 3750 in your IOS release is
better match. It would be arrogant to assume that non of our problems were
caused by operator mistakes, I'm sure some field-techs have done it wrong.
Arrogant of you?
-0400
From: David Coulson da...@davidcoulson.net
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
Message-ID: 4fb69b3d.3060...@davidcoulson.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
In a datacenter environment, we typically deploy 4948 top-of-rack
On (2012-05-19 22:25 -0500), Tony Varriale wrote:
If you follow the rules, those are the easiest, most non-eventful
events ever. I've done over 100 and had no issues.
This is curious statement, it implies that if you are operating devices as
per documentation, nothing ever goes wrong. But I'm
On 5/19/12 11:24 PM, Tony Varriale wrote:
The first and most important question is: Is this a real datacenter?
If so, 3750xyz is not for you.
Yes, it is. Why not?
Also, the regular 4948s are not much better.
We've been using 4948s for years. Never had any issues with them, beyond
the
On Sun, 2012-05-20 at 07:49 -0400, David Coulson wrote:
On 5/19/12 11:24 PM, Tony Varriale wrote:
The first and most important question is: Is this a real datacenter?
If so, 3750xyz is not for you.
Yes, it is. Why not?
I think Tony's question is about wether you actually need to move a
Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 10:48:21 +0800
From: Alexander Lim nsp.alexander@gmail.com
To: Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
Message-ID: c336d8ab-75b4-482f-8d80-3eb638845...@gmail.com
Content-Type
On 5/20/2012 3:36 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2012-05-19 22:25 -0500), Tony Varriale wrote:
If you follow the rules, those are the easiest, most non-eventful
events ever. I've done over 100 and had no issues.
This is curious statement, it implies that if you are operating devices as
per
On 5/20/2012 2:49 PM, chris stand wrote:
The ability to reboot a 5K by itself, in fact you can upgrade hardware
this way, vs 3750x stack is a worthwhile positive point.
The ability to separate by distance ... say 100 feet if needed a 5K
from its peer ... another positive point.
What about
Just to provide another data point / opinion...
We have 3560, 3560X, 3750, 3750E, 3750X all deployed, typically as CE
routers. We are moving to 3750s to stack for redundancy.
Most are well-behaved with a few exceptions...
Any of the X-series with a microcode update can take 30 minutes or more
When doing IOS upgrade, you need to reboot the whole switches in the stack.
Regards,
Alexander Halim
On May 19, 2012, at 5:00 AM, Keegan Holley keegan.hol...@sungard.com wrote:
The 3750X is relatively new so I've only seen a few of them. Stackwise in
general is pretty solid. I've never
On 19/05/2012 09:11, Alexander Lim wrote:
When doing IOS upgrade, you need to reboot the whole switches in the stack.
yes - and this can cause unexpectedly long outages during your maintenance
windows. I've found the stacking to be very reliable in general, but the
upgrade hit is bad news
On (2012-05-18 14:55 -0400), David Coulson wrote:
Does anyone have any solid experience with 3750X switches, or
stacking in a datacenter in general? I've seen plenty of stacks for
We've had quite many 3750 stacks, and we do see more problems in them than
in other 3750 stacks.
Particularly
On 5/19/12, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
On (2012-05-18 14:55 -0400), David Coulson wrote:
Does anyone have any solid experience with 3750X switches, or
stacking in a datacenter in general? I've seen plenty of stacks for
We've had quite many 3750 stacks, and we do see more problems in them
On (2012-05-19 07:47 -0400), Lee wrote:
How about VSS? We're considering it mainly because it would eliminate STP
There are already horror stories in c-nsp, where software defect has taken
whole VSS cluster down. STP is very unlikely to do that, as the code is lot
simpler and lot more mature.
The 3750X is relatively new so I've only seen a few of them. Stackwise in
general is pretty solid. I've never seen a whole stack fail. If a member
fails the stack just keeps going, if the master tails a new master is
elected.
For the most part my experience is in-line with the above, yet
Coulson)
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:55:57 -0400
From: David Coulson da...@davidcoulson.net
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
Message-ID: 4fb69b3d.3060...@davidcoulson.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Thanks for the correction.
Regards,
Alexander Lim
On May 19, 2012, at 6:41 PM, Daniel Husand dan...@fnutt.net wrote:
On 19/5/12 10:11 , Alexander Lim wrote:
When doing IOS upgrade, you need to reboot the whole switches in the stack.
No, in 12.2(58) 3750E and X got support for RSU
Wouwscary.
Any clue if Nexus is better than VSS?
Regards,
Alexander Lim
On May 19, 2012, at 8:10 PM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
On (2012-05-19 07:47 -0400), Lee wrote:
How about VSS? We're considering it mainly because it would eliminate STP
There are already horror stories in
On 5/19/2012 6:21 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2012-05-18 14:55 -0400), David Coulson wrote:
Does anyone have any solid experience with 3750X switches, or
stacking in a datacenter in general? I've seen plenty of stacks for
We've had quite many 3750 stacks, and we do see more problems in them than
On 5/18/2012 1:55 PM, David Coulson wrote:
In a datacenter environment, we typically deploy 4948 top-of-rack
switches with L2 uplinks to our 6500 core - Systems get connections
into two different switches and rely on OS NIC bonding (mostly Linux)
to support switch failures. Switches running
On 5/19/2012 6:47 AM, Lee wrote:
On 5/19/12, Saku Yttis...@ytti.fi wrote:
On (2012-05-18 14:55 -0400), David Coulson wrote:
Does anyone have any solid experience with 3750X switches, or
stacking in a datacenter in general? I've seen plenty of stacks for
We've had quite many 3750 stacks, and
On 5/19/2012 7:03 PM, scott owens wrote:
How about Nexus 5010s.
^ +10 other than a missing odd feature. The Nexus 55xx are
purty nice boxen and have HA features that the 375x only dream about.
tv
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
Any clue if Nexus is better than VSS?
vPC is not necessarily better than VSS, just different. Be aware that there
are a large number of design caveats around both and you're best to read the
documentation (and blogs and everything else) before making an informed
decision. Having been on the
. Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E (David Coulson)
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:55:57 -0400
From: David Coulson da...@davidcoulson.net
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
Message-ID: 4fb69b3d.3060...@davidcoulson.net
Content-Type: text
If you're trying to eliminate STP, try Flexlink... which the Nexus 5010
doesn't support, but the 5500 series (apparently) does.
3750X does support Flexlink it seems.
*Skeeve Stevens, CEO*
eintellego Pty Ltd
ske...@eintellego.net ; www.eintellego.net http://www.eintellego.net.au
Phone: 1300 753
Coulson da...@davidcoulson.net
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
Message-ID: 4fb69b3d.3060...@davidcoulson.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
In a datacenter environment, we typically deploy 4948 top-of-rack
switches
In a datacenter environment, we typically deploy 4948 top-of-rack
switches with L2 uplinks to our 6500 core - Systems get connections into
two different switches and rely on OS NIC bonding (mostly Linux) to
support switch failures. Switches running STP and in the last four years
we've had no
The 3750X is relatively new so I've only seen a few of them. Stackwise in
general is pretty solid. I've never seen a whole stack fail. If a member
fails the stack just keeps going, if the master tails a new master is
elected. One thing to watch out for is the fact that the 3750X isn't
intended
41 matches
Mail list logo
