Yup. If you are already in bed with Cisco for your phone system, you may as well go all the way.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 7:57 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Switch Purchase Question... If you are using Call Manager stick with Cisco, the integration will be well worth the cost and trial of doing it any other way. -----Original Message----- From: Chyka, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 9:49 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Switch Purchase Question... Does HP have POE switches? We are rolling out Cisco Call Manager in the Fall so I would like to have POE switches if possible. I am a big Cisco fan for their feature set etc. but im looking for cheaper alternatives in case I get shot down for the Cisco pricing. Thanks.. -----Original Message----- From: kenw [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 9:41 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Switch Purchase Question... I use HP nearly all the time now. While Cisco gear is good, unless you're doing a fairly large implementation, the time it can take to get them configured right can be expensive. I had a situation a while ago, due to Cisco's default configuration for bridge discovery, that caused a lot of hassle. An XP box behind another switch had defaulted to bridge mode, the Cisco saw it, panicked, and disconnected the port, causing a whole section of the network to "go dark". Took a few times to figure out what was happening. My complaint is that neither Cisco nor Microsoft had any documented recognition of the issue, nor any recommendation on how to deal with it, and the support wasn't much help. A caution on the HPs, though: they've brought out some new, low-cost, semi-managed switches that I've put where I can't do anything else. They're still pretty green, don't cluster, and are generally feature-poor. There's an undocumented "feature" wherein if you use ports 1 and 2 for a trunk, and there's a power cycle, they will reset to factory defaults. Also, I'm seeing a lot of compatibility issues with low cost gigabit PC NICs, wherein they don't negotiate speed/duplex/etc. properly, and users with gigabit cards start running at 100MB with truly crappy performance. They seem to be happy with Intel NICs, FWIW. HP's bringing new firmware out for them fairly often. /kenw > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: January-29-08 4:05 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Switch Purchase Question... > > Price to functionality on the say 2800 series HP and equivalent Cisco > you will get a better price/warranty from HP over Cisco any day. > Cisco is good stuff, really good stuff.. but the cost of managing the > Cisco, TAC agreement if you don't know, and the warranty as compared to > HP, always = better value for our shop to go HP. > > I have had switches that are 6 years old have a bad port go bad and HP > sends a refurb'd switch out next day. And you don't even have to buy a > better warranty it comes with it. > > Unless you can show me a specific feature I need not available on HP, > that would be my only reason for going Cisco at this time. > > Greg > -----Original Message----- > From: Edward B. DREGER [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 5:18 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Switch Purchase Question... > > MEJ> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:03:21 -0500 > MEJ> From: Micheal Espinola Jr > > MEJ> Over Cisco? Can you give an example? > > See earlier posts. Again, we're talking low-end switches; I've not run > the bigger HPs. > > HP: Never a problem with hardware or firmware over the years. > > Cisco: IIRC was slower to offer SSHv2. > > Cisco: Unless the 29xx now has things like 802.1x, HP gets the nod. > > Cisco: Wicked problems with 5500 (yes, a while back) and "redundant" > FEC aggregates. > > Cisco: Some of my bias comes from nasty experiences on their router > gear > not living up to spec (think: special interim IOS release because of > buggy MPLS code; not reaching near advertised forwarding rates with any > "real" routing processes and ACLs) > > HP isn't perfect, though. I wish the 25xx allowed baby jumbograms for > non-802.3ad ethertypes, such as MPLS. Can't recall if the lower-end > Ciscos do, either, for that matter. > > (Yes, some of these experiences date back several years.) > > > Eddy > -- > > Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building > Phone: +1 785 865 5885 Lawrence and [inter]national > Phone: +1 316 794 8922 Wichita > _______________________________________________________________________ > _ > DO NOT send mail to the following addresses: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -*- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -*- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sending mail to spambait addresses is a great way to get blocked. > Ditto for broken OOO autoresponders and foolish AV software > backscatter. > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
