On 9/23/10 2:32 AM, Jeffrey Denton wrote: > Looking at getting a couple of 3945s. NM-16ESW-1GIG is being > recommended by one of my colleagues. He prefers the easy of use, not > having to session in to the module. It's been pointed out that the > router IOS will have to devote some of it's time to the module and > perform the switching functions. We would have to get the 3945 as the > module is not supported in the 3945E. > > The NME-16ES-1GIG is of course a newer generation. The module runs > it's own IOS image. > > PoE is not a requirement. > > Links to the data sheets: > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps259/product_data_sheet09186a00801aca3e.html > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps5855/product_data_sheet0900aecd8028d15f.html > > How much does the older module affect the performance of the router > itself when compared to the newer module? >
The two are completely different beasts that exist together, not necessarily a replacement or upgrade for the other, so you need to pick the one that meets your requirements the best. If you get a NM module the ISR sees/manages it. You do L3 routing with an SVI. L2 stays on the module, not through the router CPU. The HWIC-4ESW or HWIC-9ESW modules are the same as a NM-16ESW, the difference is port count. If you're primarily going to be doing a lot of L2 traffic and little L3, then this variant will suit you fine. Pretend it's like having a 2690 series switch in module form; you are saving space and combining management into a single device. If you get an NME module then you're effectively buying a 3750 that fits into the router slot. It runs the 3750 IOS image. Treat it like it's an external switch, not a module. The advantage is space saving, but they are indeed two distinct devices. ~Seth _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
