Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 5:40 PM, CiscoNSP_list CiscoNSP_list cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: We currently use 3750x stack to terminate pairs of 2960S(TOR's) - Our traffic is quite bursty, and we are getting hit with the small buffers (output drops)...any suggestions on alternative platforms? (We only do L2 on the current switches) 6503's w/ VSS? 4500x w/ VSS? Nexus w/ Vpc? If you only want to do layer 2, you could also look at a pair of Nexus 5Ks and run VPC - or look at other vendors. Do you really need two chassis/ VSS? 4500s don't have VSS yet, so you could possibly get away with a 4500 - possible a second 4500 as a cold spare. Andrew ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
Thanks Andrew - The Nexus do look nice...The 5010/5020 are EOL'd correct?(But still able to get smartnet on them?)Is there a significant price point difference between these and the 5548(P?) If the Nexus are heinously expensive, I might look at the 4500's as you suggest.or perhaps the 4900's?(I do require 6+ SFP for fibre connections though) Cheers. Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 18:57:14 +1100 Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives From: and...@2sheds.de To: cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com CC: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 5:40 PM, CiscoNSP_list CiscoNSP_list cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: We currently use 3750x stack to terminate pairs of 2960S(TOR's) - Our traffic is quite bursty, and we are getting hit with the small buffers (output drops)...any suggestions on alternative platforms? (We only do L2 on the current switches) 6503's w/ VSS? 4500x w/ VSS? Nexus w/ Vpc? If you only want to do layer 2, you could also look at a pair of Nexus 5Ks and run VPC - or look at other vendors. Do you really need two chassis/ VSS? 4500s don't have VSS yet, so you could possibly get away with a 4500 - possible a second 4500 as a cold spare. Andrew ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:56 AM, CiscoNSP_list CiscoNSP_list cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Andrew - The Nexus do look nice...The 5010/5020 are EOL'd correct?(But still able to get smartnet on them?)Is there a significant price point difference between these and the 5548(P?) The Nexus 5548 should cost about the same as the 5020 - but you would need to check this and speak with your Cisco sales rep. If the Nexus are heinously expensive, I might look at the 4500's as you suggest.or perhaps the 4900's?(I do require 6+ SFP for fibre connections though) Do you require SFP+ or SFP? (10G or 1G)? The 4500 Sup7E and 4500X should support VSS by the start of next year (probably mid until it is stable). If you can wait that long with the VSS requirement you could probably buy a 4500 now, and VSS it later. HP also have their own version of VSS called IRF which you will find on their H3C range of switches - I believe it is now called HP Comware. This may also be an alternative. Andrew ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
Just one clarification. The 5548UP is around the same price as the 5010 was. The 5520 is a 2u model which closer the 5596UP. Sent from handheld. On Nov 19, 2012, at 6:28 PM, Andrew Miehs and...@2sheds.de wrote: On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:56 AM, CiscoNSP_list CiscoNSP_list cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Andrew - The Nexus do look nice...The 5010/5020 are EOL'd correct?(But still able to get smartnet on them?)Is there a significant price point difference between these and the 5548(P?) The Nexus 5548 should cost about the same as the 5020 - but you would need to check this and speak with your Cisco sales rep. If the Nexus are heinously expensive, I might look at the 4500's as you suggest.or perhaps the 4900's?(I do require 6+ SFP for fibre connections though) Do you require SFP+ or SFP? (10G or 1G)? The 4500 Sup7E and 4500X should support VSS by the start of next year (probably mid until it is stable). If you can wait that long with the VSS requirement you could probably buy a 4500 now, and VSS it later. HP also have their own version of VSS called IRF which you will find on their H3C range of switches - I believe it is now called HP Comware. This may also be an alternative. Andrew ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
Thanks Andrew (And apologies for not replying inline, stupid Hotmail make it nigh on impossible) We currently only require 1G(SFP), but would like the flexibility to go to 10G when required...so, something like: 2 x 4500-e with Sup7e + WS-X4748-RJ45-E + WS-X4612-SFP-E ? Or 2 x 4500x with similar ports as 4500-e Or 2 x Nexus 5548 Is there a big price difference between these? Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:27:06 +1100 Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives From: and...@2sheds.de To: cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com CC: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:56 AM, CiscoNSP_list CiscoNSP_list cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Andrew - The Nexus do look nice...The 5010/5020 are EOL'd correct?(But still able to get smartnet on them?)Is there a significant price point difference between these and the 5548(P?) The Nexus 5548 should cost about the same as the 5020 - but you would need to check this and speak with your Cisco sales rep. If the Nexus are heinously expensive, I might look at the 4500's as you suggest.or perhaps the 4900's?(I do require 6+ SFP for fibre connections though) Do you require SFP+ or SFP? (10G or 1G)? The 4500 Sup7E and 4500X should support VSS by the start of next year (probably mid until it is stable). If you can wait that long with the VSS requirement you could probably buy a 4500 now, and VSS it later. HP also have their own version of VSS called IRF which you will find on their H3C range of switches - I believe it is now called HP Comware. This may also be an alternative. Andrew ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, CiscoNSP_list CiscoNSP_list cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: 2 x 4500-e with Sup7e + WS-X4748-RJ45-E + WS-X4612-SFP-E ? Or 2 x 4500x with similar ports as 4500-e Or 2 x Nexus 5548 Is there a big price difference between these? Contact your Cisco reseller. He may be able to provide you with a global price list so that you can see the relative price of all the items. You will want some form of support on these boxes as well as you NEED to be able to download updates. Otherwise you will have me here all day working out Cisco prices :) Based on my gut feeling - I would think that the best solution for you would probably be a c4506 with a Sup7E. You could get your redundancy by using spanning tree rather than port channels until VSS becomes available. The 4500s are also quite a good layer 3 switch so you ever require layer 3 functionality. (Extra licenses however). NOTE: I can of course not guarantee that Cisco will bring out VSS for the 4500s or that it won't be an extra cost on the Sup7E - I can only state what I have read. Regards Andrew ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
If you seriously have 10G on the roadmap, 4500X looks sweet, you can get it in a 16-port version, SFP / SFP+ you upgrade as you are ready. A pair of them in a VSS deployment is going to be pretty steep however, especially if you need smart layer-3 (Enterprise). Otherwise perhaps a 4507E+R with a pair of Sup7Es, you can pre-load redundant power, Supervisors, and blades to fit the need now; if the VSS pans out you just need another chassis (and whatever else you may want redundantly redundant). Or go with 3750E/X if their mac address tables meet your needs. You get two 10G ports per switch, you can always uplink to a dumber/cheaper L2 10G switch. Jeff On 11/19/2012 8:00 PM, Andrew Miehs wrote: On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, CiscoNSP_list CiscoNSP_list cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: 2 x 4500-e with Sup7e + WS-X4748-RJ45-E + WS-X4612-SFP-E ? Or 2 x 4500x with similar ports as 4500-e Or 2 x Nexus 5548 Is there a big price difference between these? Contact your Cisco reseller. He may be able to provide you with a global price list so that you can see the relative price of all the items. You will want some form of support on these boxes as well as you NEED to be able to download updates. Otherwise you will have me here all day working out Cisco prices :) Based on my gut feeling - I would think that the best solution for you would probably be a c4506 with a Sup7E. You could get your redundancy by using spanning tree rather than port channels until VSS becomes available. The 4500s are also quite a good layer 3 switch so you ever require layer 3 functionality. (Extra licenses however). NOTE: I can of course not guarantee that Cisco will bring out VSS for the 4500s or that it won't be an extra cost on the Sup7E - I can only state what I have read. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
Now that the price list appears to be updated on CCX and netformx, it seems the 4500X is a pretty good choice. I didn't have the same experience with steep pricing on the ent version, at least not when compared to the LAN base - IP base - Ent upgrade pricing for the 4500E. -ryan -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Kell Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 8:10 PM To: Andrew Miehs Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives If you seriously have 10G on the roadmap, 4500X looks sweet, you can get it in a 16-port version, SFP / SFP+ you upgrade as you are ready. A pair of them in a VSS deployment is going to be pretty steep however, especially if you need smart layer-3 (Enterprise). Otherwise perhaps a 4507E+R with a pair of Sup7Es, you can pre-load redundant power, Supervisors, and blades to fit the need now; if the VSS pans out you just need another chassis (and whatever else you may want redundantly redundant). Or go with 3750E/X if their mac address tables meet your needs. You get two 10G ports per switch, you can always uplink to a dumber/cheaper L2 10G switch. Jeff On 11/19/2012 8:00 PM, Andrew Miehs wrote: On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:34 AM, CiscoNSP_list CiscoNSP_list cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: 2 x 4500-e with Sup7e + WS-X4748-RJ45-E + WS-X4612-SFP-E ? Or 2 x 4500x with similar ports as 4500-e Or 2 x Nexus 5548 Is there a big price difference between these? Contact your Cisco reseller. He may be able to provide you with a global price list so that you can see the relative price of all the items. You will want some form of support on these boxes as well as you NEED to be able to download updates. Otherwise you will have me here all day working out Cisco prices :) Based on my gut feeling - I would think that the best solution for you would probably be a c4506 with a Sup7E. You could get your redundancy by using spanning tree rather than port channels until VSS becomes available. The 4500s are also quite a good layer 3 switch so you ever require layer 3 functionality. (Extra licenses however). NOTE: I can of course not guarantee that Cisco will bring out VSS for the 4500s or that it won't be an extra cost on the Sup7E - I can only state what I have read. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Jeff Kell jeff-k...@utc.edu wrote: If you seriously have 10G on the roadmap, 4500X looks sweet, you can get it in a 16-port version, SFP / SFP+ you upgrade as you are ready. A pair of them in a VSS deployment is going to be pretty steep however, especially if you need smart layer-3 (Enterprise). Thats what I thought too - but don't know how big a deployment is planned, and you loose a couple of ports for VSS and a couple of ports for your uplink. Otherwise perhaps a 4507E+R with a pair of Sup7Es, you can pre-load redundant power, Supervisors, and blades to fit the need now; if the VSS pans out you just need another chassis (and whatever else you may want redundantly redundant). Not a big fan of the redundant supervisors (old habit from the 7500s) - and spanning tree would probably be adequate based on what I have understood. Or go with 3750E/X if their mac address tables meet your needs. You get two 10G ports per switch, you can always uplink to a dumber/cheaper L2 10G switch. The OP seemed to be having an issue with bursty traffic, which is why I would push him away from the 37xx product line. Andrew ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
On 11/19/2012 8:38 PM, Andrew Miehs wrote: The OP seemed to be having an issue with bursty traffic, which is why I would push him away from the 37xx product line. Yes. I continue to be disappointed at 2960/3560/3570 buffer performance (so much to the extent that we're currently deploying another vendor at L2). We're still somewhat L3 bound to Cisco for the moment. Also not impressed with the IPv6 capabilities (and associated restrictions if you try) of the line. They have apparently run their course without a significant architecture/hardware change. Especially given no IPv6/VRF support on the lower-end Catalysts. Jeff ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] 3750x Alternatives
Hi Guys, We currently use 3750x stack to terminate pairs of 2960S(TOR's) - Our traffic is quite bursty, and we are getting hit with the small buffers (output drops)...any suggestions on alternative platforms? (We only do L2 on the current switches) 6503's w/ VSS? 4500x w/ VSS? Nexus w/ Vpc? We dont want to spend a fortune, so potentially the Nexus+4500x are too expensive? Cheers. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
Does anybody know that absolute answer, if a 3750X can or cannot stack with a 3750 or 3750E ? I have heard both Yes and No from Cisco ? Thanks for any info. Jeff Fitzwater OIT Network Telecommunications Systems Princeton University ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
On Oct 12, 2011, at 8:56 AM, Jeffrey G. Fitzwater wrote: Does anybody know that absolute answer, if a 3750X can or cannot stack with a 3750 or 3750E ? I have heard both Yes and No from Cisco ? Please refer to the following: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps6406/qa_c67-578933.html Search for are mixed stacks supported? within the above document. -jav ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
If you go into configuration mode, and then do a switch number provision ? command, it will show you what models, are currently supported for stacking, on your current code. Thank You Daniel Bielawa Network Engineer Liberty University Network Services (434)592-7987 LIBERTY UNIVERSITY 40 Years of Training Champions for Christ: 1971-2011 -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Javier Henderson Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 9:06 AM To: Jeffrey G. Fitzwater Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ?? On Oct 12, 2011, at 8:56 AM, Jeffrey G. Fitzwater wrote: Does anybody know that absolute answer, if a 3750X can or cannot stack with a 3750 or 3750E ? I have heard both Yes and No from Cisco ? Please refer to the following: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps6406/qa_c67-578933.html Search for are mixed stacks supported? within the above document. -jav ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
On 10/12/2011 8:56 AM, Jeffrey G. Fitzwater wrote: Does anybody know that absolute answer, if a 3750X can or cannot stack with a 3750 or 3750E ? A 3750X LAN Base image cannot stack with anything (other than another 3750X LAN Base image switch). A 3750X IP Base or IP Services will stack with 3750/3750E, with the usual caveat that the ring will default to the least common denominator (32G for 3750, 64G for 3750E). The 3750X LAN base is not even recognized with 3750/3750E stacks, at least up through 12.2(55) Jeff ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
On 12/10/2011 13:56, Jeffrey G. Fitzwater wrote: Does anybody know that absolute answer, if a 3750X can or cannot stack with a 3750 or 3750E ? I have heard both Yes and No from Cisco ? http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps6406/data_sheet_c78-584733.html The answer is yes, but... you need to be careful to run the same version of software with a compatible license. In practice, this means that you will need to use at least the IP Base license on the -X switch. Also, you may need to check whether running multiple -x switches in a stack with other 3750s will disable stackpower completely. Nick ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
Here is a doc with caveat to all of this… and we have the 12S and so buying an X won't work. * The 3750-X Fiber switches (WS-C3750X-12S and WS-C3750X-24S) don't stack with the old WS-C3750G-12S switches due to HW and SW limitations on the WS-C3750G-12S. © 2011 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. This document is Cisco Public Information. Jeff Thanks to all for info. On Oct 12, 2011, at 10:24 , Nick Hilliard wrote: On 12/10/2011 13:56, Jeffrey G. Fitzwater wrote: Does anybody know that absolute answer, if a 3750X can or cannot stack with a 3750 or 3750E ? I have heard both Yes and No from Cisco ? http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps6406/data_sheet_c78-584733.html The answer is yes, but... you need to be careful to run the same version of software with a compatible license. In practice, this means that you will need to use at least the IP Base license on the -X switch. Also, you may need to check whether running multiple -x switches in a stack with other 3750s will disable stackpower completely. Nick ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:56:28 +, you wrote: Does anybody know that absolute answer, if a 3750X can or cannot stack with a 3750 or 3750E ? Can. If you stack 3750-X with -X og -E, it will run StackWise Plus. If you stack with 3750, it will only run StackWise. See http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps5023/prod_white_paper09186a00801b096a.html -A ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
Hi Jeff, I recently stacked 3750x-48pf-s running ip base with 3750v2-24. I originally attempted to use 12.2(55) but the stack failed to initialize, almost like the stack ports on the 3750x were err-disabling. After some hair pulling I downgraded to 12.2(53) ( lowest version supported by both) and it did a full EEPROM rewrite on the 3750x. The stacking worked properly after that. So the short of it is try to test the code in the lab first and not during the change window :) Sent from my iPad On 12/10/2011, at 10:56 PM, Jeffrey G. Fitzwater jf...@princeton.edu wrote: Does anybody know that absolute answer, if a 3750X can or cannot stack with a 3750 or 3750E ? I have heard both Yes and No from Cisco ? Thanks for any info. Jeff Fitzwater OIT Network Telecommunications Systems Princeton University ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
On 10/12/11 9:06 AM, Jeff Kell wrote: A 3750X IP Base or IP Services will stack with 3750/3750E, with the usual caveat that the ring will default to the least common denominator (32G for 3750, 64G for 3750E). And that a mixed-platform stack will operate in legacy mode, i.e. no local switching, every packet will go all the way around the ring, bidirectional rings won't see optimal directionalization. pt ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X stacking with 3750 ??
Thus spake Pete Templin (peteli...@templin.org) on Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 04:30:05PM -0500: On 10/12/11 9:06 AM, Jeff Kell wrote: A 3750X IP Base or IP Services will stack with 3750/3750E, with the usual caveat that the ring will default to the least common denominator (32G for 3750, 64G for 3750E). And that a mixed-platform stack will operate in legacy mode, i.e. no local switching, every packet will go all the way around the ring, bidirectional rings won't see optimal directionalization. Can you point me to documentation on this? I thought the E/X series would still do local switching before frames hit the ring asic. Dale ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:16:15 +0300, Adrian Minta wrote Please don't tell me there wasn't enough space for XFP cages, which would have given us full choice between LR/ER/ZR/DWDM optics. Pushing SFP+ into this market is complete ignorance of SP needs. Googling for SFP+ ZR (80Km) reveal more and more results. Perhaps some of them are real, perhaps C knows something here. See e.g.http://seclists.org/nanog/2010/May/208 Well, maybe someone starts mass-production of DWDM SFP+ two years from now. But still, what's the point of switching service provider equipment to a form factor, which was tagetted at ultra high-density short-reach datacenter environments? We know that all SONET/SDH and DWDM gear must stay with XFP due to techical limitations of SFP+. ZR/DWDM modules are not cheap, and it's a big difference whether you need to keep spares just for the XFP form factor, or in the worst case for all of XENPAK, X2, XFP and now SFP+. BTW, we had this discussion 3 months ago: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/nsp/127408 Bottom line: for all our purchases, SFP+ is going to be a show stopper. M. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:45:40 +0300, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote ME-3800X http://www1.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10965/index.html ME-3600X http://www1.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10956/index.html Their datasheets aren't available yet. ME-3800X datasheet appeared in between. It says 256 MB of buffering, which sounds good. However, the 10GE uplink options look like a bad joke - SR, LR, LRM and copper ?! Is this datacenter-oriented box or have service providers switched to multimode copper during last months? Please don't tell me there wasn't enough space for XFP cages, which would have given us full choice between LR/ER/ZR/DWDM optics. Pushing SFP+ into this market is complete ignorance of SP needs. M. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On 06/22/10 10:24, Marian Ďurkovič wrote: ME-3800X datasheet appeared in between. It says 256 MB of buffering, which sounds good. However, the 10GE uplink options look like a bad joke - SR, LR, LRM and copper ?! Is this datacenter-oriented box or have service providers switched to multimode copper during last months? Please don't tell me there wasn't enough space for XFP cages, which would have given us full choice between LR/ER/ZR/DWDM optics. Pushing SFP+ into this market is complete ignorance of SP needs. M. Googling for SFP+ ZR (80Km) reveal more and more results. Perhaps some of them are real, perhaps C knows something here. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On 22/06/2010 16:16, Adrian Minta wrote: Googling for SFP+ ZR (80Km) reveal more and more results. Perhaps some of them are real, perhaps C knows something here. But none with prices and availability. Once you get your hands on an 80km sfp+ transceiver, please let me know! :-) Nick ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
ME-3800X http://www1.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10965/index.html ME-3600X http://www1.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10956/index.html Their datasheets aren't available yet. -- Tassos Phil Bedard wrote on 18/04/2010 23:48: I've seen a presentation on them but that was over a year ago, and there were a lot of things coming which weren't there yet. We've been looking at the ALU SAS-M platform recently. They are 24xSFP and have models with 2x10GE and CES modules as well. They support OSPF/ISIS/LDP/RSVP-TE (1:1 FRR only) but do not have much routing capability (16K routes max right now) but if you are looking to extend VLL/VPLS services they may work for most folks. The pricing on them is pretty good too. Not sure on IPv6 support, think it's a roadmap item. Phil On Apr 18, 2010, at 3:16 PM, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: Anyone got any experience with Huawei's CX600? Two smaller models (X1 and X2) are coming out and they seem promising enough. http://www.huawei.com/news/view.do?id=11153cid=42 -- Tassos Mark Tinka wrote on 18/04/2010 16:17: On Thursday 15 April 2010 07:54:13 pm Anton Kapela wrote: Also, cer2k has 512k v4 tcam entries, dual ac/dc, consumes 1u of space, draws under 300 watts, and actually has working bgp/vpls/etc *today* -- not somewhere over the me3400G rainbow. I had a chance to beat these boxes a fair bit toward the end of last year, during our consideration for platforms that will let us extend MPLS into the Access. While they are formidable (Cisco's ME3400 is pretty useless for MPLS in the Access, their 3750ME lacks Gig-E + Jumbo frames on customer facing ports, e.t.c., Juniper's EX-series boxes are pretty useless in this field too, and the MX80 is worthy but too pricey/big), there's a number of issues that still need sorting out (some may, some may never). While I can't get into the specifics of these limitations (NDA, blah blah), you'll definitely be chasing the code for at least another couple of years to reach parity with the rest of your network. Hot on my list: IPv6 is currently not supported, but is roadmapped for the future (feature by feature, of course). All that said, in all honesty, if you can live with the limitations or workaround them, there currently isn't a better product in the market that offers 48-port tri-rate copper, fibre-based Gig-E/10-Gig-E connections with acceptable MPLS support, especially if you're considering just EoMPLS and VPLS. And coming from me, that's probably saying much :-)... Cheers, Mark. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
Anyone looked at Extreme X480s ? I would wonder about their limitations in MPLS to the access environment. Best Regards, -mat On 18 April 2010 21:48, Phil Bedard phil...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen a presentation on them but that was over a year ago, and there were a lot of things coming which weren't there yet. We've been looking at the ALU SAS-M platform recently. They are 24xSFP and have models with 2x10GE and CES modules as well. They support OSPF/ISIS/LDP/RSVP-TE (1:1 FRR only) but do not have much routing capability (16K routes max right now) but if you are looking to extend VLL/VPLS services they may work for most folks. The pricing on them is pretty good too. Not sure on IPv6 support, think it's a roadmap item. Phil On Apr 18, 2010, at 3:16 PM, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: Anyone got any experience with Huawei's CX600? Two smaller models (X1 and X2) are coming out and they seem promising enough. http://www.huawei.com/news/view.do?id=11153cid=42 -- Tassos Mark Tinka wrote on 18/04/2010 16:17: On Thursday 15 April 2010 07:54:13 pm Anton Kapela wrote: Also, cer2k has 512k v4 tcam entries, dual ac/dc, consumes 1u of space, draws under 300 watts, and actually has working bgp/vpls/etc *today* -- not somewhere over the me3400G rainbow. I had a chance to beat these boxes a fair bit toward the end of last year, during our consideration for platforms that will let us extend MPLS into the Access. While they are formidable (Cisco's ME3400 is pretty useless for MPLS in the Access, their 3750ME lacks Gig-E + Jumbo frames on customer facing ports, e.t.c., Juniper's EX-series boxes are pretty useless in this field too, and the MX80 is worthy but too pricey/big), there's a number of issues that still need sorting out (some may, some may never). While I can't get into the specifics of these limitations (NDA, blah blah), you'll definitely be chasing the code for at least another couple of years to reach parity with the rest of your network. Hot on my list: IPv6 is currently not supported, but is roadmapped for the future (feature by feature, of course). All that said, in all honesty, if you can live with the limitations or workaround them, there currently isn't a better product in the market that offers 48-port tri-rate copper, fibre-based Gig-E/10-Gig-E connections with acceptable MPLS support, especially if you're considering just EoMPLS and VPLS. And coming from me, that's probably saying much :-)... Cheers, Mark. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-...@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-...@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-...@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On Thursday 15 April 2010 07:54:13 pm Anton Kapela wrote: Also, cer2k has 512k v4 tcam entries, dual ac/dc, consumes 1u of space, draws under 300 watts, and actually has working bgp/vpls/etc *today* -- not somewhere over the me3400G rainbow. I had a chance to beat these boxes a fair bit toward the end of last year, during our consideration for platforms that will let us extend MPLS into the Access. While they are formidable (Cisco's ME3400 is pretty useless for MPLS in the Access, their 3750ME lacks Gig-E + Jumbo frames on customer facing ports, e.t.c., Juniper's EX-series boxes are pretty useless in this field too, and the MX80 is worthy but too pricey/big), there's a number of issues that still need sorting out (some may, some may never). While I can't get into the specifics of these limitations (NDA, blah blah), you'll definitely be chasing the code for at least another couple of years to reach parity with the rest of your network. Hot on my list: IPv6 is currently not supported, but is roadmapped for the future (feature by feature, of course). All that said, in all honesty, if you can live with the limitations or workaround them, there currently isn't a better product in the market that offers 48-port tri-rate copper, fibre-based Gig-E/10-Gig-E connections with acceptable MPLS support, especially if you're considering just EoMPLS and VPLS. And coming from me, that's probably saying much :-)... Cheers, Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
Anyone got any experience with Huawei's CX600? Two smaller models (X1 and X2) are coming out and they seem promising enough. http://www.huawei.com/news/view.do?id=11153cid=42 -- Tassos Mark Tinka wrote on 18/04/2010 16:17: On Thursday 15 April 2010 07:54:13 pm Anton Kapela wrote: Also, cer2k has 512k v4 tcam entries, dual ac/dc, consumes 1u of space, draws under 300 watts, and actually has working bgp/vpls/etc *today* -- not somewhere over the me3400G rainbow. I had a chance to beat these boxes a fair bit toward the end of last year, during our consideration for platforms that will let us extend MPLS into the Access. While they are formidable (Cisco's ME3400 is pretty useless for MPLS in the Access, their 3750ME lacks Gig-E + Jumbo frames on customer facing ports, e.t.c., Juniper's EX-series boxes are pretty useless in this field too, and the MX80 is worthy but too pricey/big), there's a number of issues that still need sorting out (some may, some may never). While I can't get into the specifics of these limitations (NDA, blah blah), you'll definitely be chasing the code for at least another couple of years to reach parity with the rest of your network. Hot on my list: IPv6 is currently not supported, but is roadmapped for the future (feature by feature, of course). All that said, in all honesty, if you can live with the limitations or workaround them, there currently isn't a better product in the market that offers 48-port tri-rate copper, fibre-based Gig-E/10-Gig-E connections with acceptable MPLS support, especially if you're considering just EoMPLS and VPLS. And coming from me, that's probably saying much :-)... Cheers, Mark. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
I've seen a presentation on them but that was over a year ago, and there were a lot of things coming which weren't there yet. We've been looking at the ALU SAS-M platform recently. They are 24xSFP and have models with 2x10GE and CES modules as well. They support OSPF/ISIS/LDP/RSVP-TE (1:1 FRR only) but do not have much routing capability (16K routes max right now) but if you are looking to extend VLL/VPLS services they may work for most folks. The pricing on them is pretty good too. Not sure on IPv6 support, think it's a roadmap item. Phil On Apr 18, 2010, at 3:16 PM, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: Anyone got any experience with Huawei's CX600? Two smaller models (X1 and X2) are coming out and they seem promising enough. http://www.huawei.com/news/view.do?id=11153cid=42 -- Tassos Mark Tinka wrote on 18/04/2010 16:17: On Thursday 15 April 2010 07:54:13 pm Anton Kapela wrote: Also, cer2k has 512k v4 tcam entries, dual ac/dc, consumes 1u of space, draws under 300 watts, and actually has working bgp/vpls/etc *today* -- not somewhere over the me3400G rainbow. I had a chance to beat these boxes a fair bit toward the end of last year, during our consideration for platforms that will let us extend MPLS into the Access. While they are formidable (Cisco's ME3400 is pretty useless for MPLS in the Access, their 3750ME lacks Gig-E + Jumbo frames on customer facing ports, e.t.c., Juniper's EX-series boxes are pretty useless in this field too, and the MX80 is worthy but too pricey/big), there's a number of issues that still need sorting out (some may, some may never). While I can't get into the specifics of these limitations (NDA, blah blah), you'll definitely be chasing the code for at least another couple of years to reach parity with the rest of your network. Hot on my list: IPv6 is currently not supported, but is roadmapped for the future (feature by feature, of course). All that said, in all honesty, if you can live with the limitations or workaround them, there currently isn't a better product in the market that offers 48-port tri-rate copper, fibre-based Gig-E/10-Gig-E connections with acceptable MPLS support, especially if you're considering just EoMPLS and VPLS. And coming from me, that's probably saying much :-)... Cheers, Mark. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
Hi, On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 08:57:13AM -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: Our vendor wants to do a dog pony show on the new 3750X (and 3560X and 2960S) switches that Cisco has just released. [..] So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions that I should be asking? Ask them about the buffer size available to packet bursts, especially in comparison to the 2960 series (who have tiny buffers and start dropping packets already under standard workload conditions). Don't accept handwaving and QoS will fix this arguments (as turning on QoS on the 2960 will carve the tiny buffers into 4 times tiny/4 buffers, making the problem *worse*...) gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de pgpteCaQkSpQ9.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On Apr 15, 2010, at 3:58 AM, Gert Doering wrote: packets already under standard workload conditions). Don't accept handwaving and QoS will fix this arguments (as turning on QoS on the 2960 will carve the tiny buffers into 4 times tiny/4 buffers, making the problem *worse*...) +1 If we looked only at the buffering configuration in the me3400, 2960, 3560, etc. it would seem that cisco is under the impression we're all doing single-MS-rtt's on our boxes, operating metro area networks in 2-mile square cities, and do not need (or even want the option to pay for) deeper queues for some ports. FWIW (and yea, I'm aware this is C-nsp), the new brocade/foundry CER2000 stuff is sporting 64/128/192 megabytes of shared packet buffer memory for the 24/28 + 2 10gig boxes, much like the 3550 was originally doing (i.e. shared buffer mem + per-port occupancy limits). Given that many of the places we tend to want a many-port gige or small 10 gig box, this could represent 100+ ms worth of buffering for a busy 'gige egress' when needed, handily permitting single-large tcp flows (or 10's of K's of multiplexed flows) to utilize all of the bandwidth/delay product. Perhaps ask them (your rep): got something under $15K list that will come close to this? Also, cer2k has 512k v4 tcam entries, dual ac/dc, consumes 1u of space, draws under 300 watts, and actually has working bgp/vpls/etc *today* -- not somewhere over the me3400G rainbow. -Tk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
Hi, On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 07:54:13AM -0400, Anton Kapela wrote: FWIW (and yea, I'm aware this is C-nsp), the new brocade/foundry CER2000 stuff is sporting 64/128/192 megabytes of shared packet buffer memory for the 24/28 + 2 10gig boxes, Sounds good. What is the price range to expect here? As Cisco 37xx gear or much higher? (We could as well go with Force10 - but as a replacement for a 2960, their gear is way too powerful, and thus, way too expensive for us :-/ ) gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de pgp5wt2BOFKiF.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On Apr 15, 2010, at 8:03 AM, Gert Doering wrote: Sounds good. What is the price range to expect here? As Cisco 37xx gear or much higher? IIRC, list on the 24 port gig sf was 14-16k, and 'advanced lic' (adds mpls/vpls/etc to the base) was 3-5k more. Memory suggests the 48 port + 2 10 gig config and full lic was mid 20's, list. Of course, ymmv, abuse your sales rep, buy bulk, etc. -Tk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] 3750X?
Our vendor wants to do a dog pony show on the new 3750X (and 3560X and 2960S) switches that Cisco has just released. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10745/index.html We're about to plonk down a big chunk of money to buy 3750G switches to replace a lot of our older network gear. We don't have 10G in the core (yet) so 10G uplinks aren't a big seller for me. The PoE+ would be nice to power the Cisco 802.11n gear that requires more than 15 watts to energize both radios (which I don't have anyway), but I don't know of any other gear yet that would require the higher power... So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions that I should be asking? -- Jeff Ollie ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
Under the very clear heading of personal opinion, I have always tried to buy the best equipment I could. I tend to have to use equipment longer than I would normally like. I know if I were ordering equipment for a new building on campus today, I would would want the PoE+ and the 10G option for the future needs I will expect the equipment to cover for the next five or six years. Also the shared power is a cool sounding idea. The only problem I ever had out of our 3750 stacks were power issues. As far as questions to ask. I would want my vendor to tell me when I could expect to see the equipment. In my environment here I only order when I need something. At best I can keep one or two switches on the shelf for emergencies. With Cisco currently, I am having to wait way longer than I can (politically speaking) for the equipment. I have even had it suggested from my administration that other companies networking gear may not be as good as Cisco's; but, it can be ordered and arrive at a reasonable time. I have been bit several times ordering a new product to be hit with the dreaded 'new product hold'. I am a little cynical about it... John L. Exum Network Manager Harding University On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote: Our vendor wants to do a dog pony show on the new 3750X (and 3560X and 2960S) switches that Cisco has just released. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10745/index.html We're about to plonk down a big chunk of money to buy 3750G switches to replace a lot of our older network gear. We don't have 10G in the core (yet) so 10G uplinks aren't a big seller for me. The PoE+ would be nice to power the Cisco 802.11n gear that requires more than 15 watts to energize both radios (which I don't have anyway), but I don't know of any other gear yet that would require the higher power... So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions that I should be asking? -- Jeff Ollie ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
Having the ability to place two power supplies in the chassis and also having the power stacking to share power supplies across multiple chassis really has me interested. The rest I mostly perceive as fluff, even if it is nice fluff. On 14 April 2010 07:57, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote: Our vendor wants to do a dog pony show on the new 3750X (and 3560X and 2960S) switches that Cisco has just released. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10745/index.html We're about to plonk down a big chunk of money to buy 3750G switches to replace a lot of our older network gear. We don't have 10G in the core (yet) so 10G uplinks aren't a big seller for me. The PoE+ would be nice to power the Cisco 802.11n gear that requires more than 15 watts to energize both radios (which I don't have anyway), but I don't know of any other gear yet that would require the higher power... So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions that I should be asking? -- Jeff Ollie ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ -- __ Saxon Jones Email: saxon.jo...@gmail.com Telephone: (780) 669-0899 Toll-free: (866) 701-8022 x2 United Kingdom: 0(1315)168664 ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
Still missing one killer feature that I would really like to see present in the access/distribution layers: NetFlow On Apr 14, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Saxon Jones wrote: Having the ability to place two power supplies in the chassis and also having the power stacking to share power supplies across multiple chassis really has me interested. The rest I mostly perceive as fluff, even if it is nice fluff. On 14 April 2010 07:57, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote: Our vendor wants to do a dog pony show on the new 3750X (and 3560X and 2960S) switches that Cisco has just released. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10745/index.html We're about to plonk down a big chunk of money to buy 3750G switches to replace a lot of our older network gear. We don't have 10G in the core (yet) so 10G uplinks aren't a big seller for me. The PoE+ would be nice to power the Cisco 802.11n gear that requires more than 15 watts to energize both radios (which I don't have anyway), but I don't know of any other gear yet that would require the higher power... So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions that I should be asking? -- Jeff Ollie ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ -- __ Saxon Jones Email: saxon.jo...@gmail.com Telephone: (780) 669-0899 Toll-free: (866) 701-8022 x2 United Kingdom: 0(1315)168664 ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On 14/04/2010 17:30, Andrew Tolstykh wrote: Still missing one killer feature that I would really like to see present in the access/distribution layers: NetFlow and sflow for l2 stuff. Nick ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 08:57 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions that I should be asking? Ask them when they will begin supporting software upgrades per-member in a stack. :-) The power sharing looks impressive. And it supports MACsec, though that's probably hardly relevant yet. Together with PoE+ those are the things that make it stand out from the 3750E in my eyes. Are these X-models considerably more expensive than E-models? Or are they targeted at replacing the E-models? -- Peter ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
the X-models are at a lower list price then the E-models. thanks .siva On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, Peter Rathlev wrote: On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 08:57 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions that I should be asking? Ask them when they will begin supporting software upgrades per-member in a stack. :-) The power sharing looks impressive. And it supports MACsec, though that's probably hardly relevant yet. Together with PoE+ those are the things that make it stand out from the 3750E in my eyes. Are these X-models considerably more expensive than E-models? Or are they targeted at replacing the E-models? -- Peter ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
I couldn't find the maximum routes when one uses the IPv4+IPv6 template, is it the same of 3750, as the IPv4 only number seems to be ? Rubens On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Siva Valliappan svall...@cisco.com wrote: the X-models are at a lower list price then the E-models. thanks .siva On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, Peter Rathlev wrote: On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 08:57 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions that I should be asking? Ask them when they will begin supporting software upgrades per-member in a stack. :-) The power sharing looks impressive. And it supports MACsec, though that's probably hardly relevant yet. Together with PoE+ those are the things that make it stand out from the 3750E in my eyes. Are these X-models considerably more expensive than E-models? Or are they targeted at replacing the E-models? -- Peter ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-...@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-...@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] 3750X?
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 01:39:18 +0200, you wrote: Are these X-models considerably more expensive than E-models? Less. Or are they targeted at replacing the E-models? Yes, both E and G, as far as I'm told. (The final prices are not in the GPL) -A ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
