Would a 3550 SMI (much cheaper version than the 3550 EMI) be comparable to the 2950 for filling out a R&S lab? It seems the lower 3550 and 2950 are very similar.
I think an important point is whether the enhancements in the EMI over SMI versions of the 3550 series will be tested in the lab? SMI has QoS which is surely important. The higher EMI also has QoS in addition to static IP routing, RACLs, and inter-VLAN routing. I doubt anyone really knows or could say at this point, but would anyone care to guess or add comments? Personally I wouldn't mind the testing of EMI's enhancements, they will be a more worthy to explore in depth than token ring, but streamlining your study is important for the lab and it never hurts to save money. Here is the differences between the 3550 SMI and EMI. from http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/si/casi/ca3550/prodlit/c3550_qp.htm The Enhanced Multilayer Software Image enables a richer set of enterprise-class features including, hardware-based IP unicast and multicast routing, inter-VLAN routing, Router access control lists (RACLs), and the Hot Standby Router Protocol (HSRP). Flexibility to upgrade to EMI after the initial deployment is provided through an EMI upgrade kit. The Cisco Catalyst 3550-12T and 3550-12G switches come installed with EMI. Additional details about the differences between the SMI and EMI are provided later in this document. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=46583&t=46583 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
