> 3550 runs IOS. That's an answer. I never allow any non-IOS router in > production environment (except high end devices, such as Juniper, when > benefits are very high). And 3550 is not expansive (yes, it is not cheap).
If you believe that IOS solves all problems, we live on different planets. > PS. How much ethernet ports do you have in the office? Do you have 100 K > ports? If not, why do you need 128K MAC's? (I know only one case, when I > need so much - some kind of DSL service... Some kind of DSL service is indeed the background for my question. > In most cases, you have 500 - 5,000 ports in one building. If you have more, > it is unlikely that you use 3550 switches. So, it is enough for the tasks > (just as performance - it have _enough_ performance). Btw, I believed that > catalist swithes have not any limitations for the MAC tables (because they > use memory _on demand_); where did you get this limitations? /I may be wrong > here/ If you believe Catalyst switches have no MAC address limitations, I have a nice plot of land in Florida to sell you :-) Ethernet switches today use CAM to hold the MAC address tables - this CAM has a finite size. > PPS. I do not know for sure, but 3550 should support traffic shaping, which > makes bufferring. Technically, yes, CEF (with packet dropping) is not good > to provide 2 Mbit by 100 Mbit link. 3550 only supports policing. Yes, I have worked extensive with 3550 and it doesn't have the features I need right now. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, [EMAIL PROTECTED]