At 10:44 PM 3/12/2003 +0000, Orlando, Jr. Palomar wrote: >Without consulting any documentation, a couple of reasons I could think of >is forwarding rate and the switch-fabric (or the size of the backplane, >usually in Gbps). A full-fledged Layer-3 switch running at "wire-speed" >would be much more efficient in routing (and switching) between VLANs >compared to a router.
Many routers route at wire speed and can do this on/between tagged VLANs. This is just routing. >Another point of comparison is port density. You can only have such and such >number of ethernet, fastethernet, or maybe even gigabit ethernet ports on a >router before the cost becomes quite prohibitive. > >Oh sure, you can use the "router-on-a-stick" method. And though it is a good >Cisco IOS feature, it was meant to be an interim solution when transitioning >from a flat to a segmented network. > >Anyway, if you only have a relatively small network, say 2 VLANs, you can >opt for the "router-on-a-stick" method. Or better yet, use a router with >dual ethernets or fastethernets. However, if you're supporting 4,5, or more >networks, that's what L-3 and multi-layer switches are for. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65301&t=65215 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
