>
> I would be interested in seeing, say, a 7609-GSR or better yet 7609-T640
> bakeoff. I think that would prove 2 things - 1) you get what you pay for,
> and 2) purpose-built routers are still better at routing heavy loads with
> diverse media. Sure, the loaded 640 will be more expensive, but i
> Things are getting better, but "L3-switches" pale in comparison to today's
> high-end routers on almost all fronts. If you take GigE out of the
> equation, modern "L3 Switches" are just as expensive as modern "core
> routers" - and routable, "mpls-able" L3 GE ports are _more_ expensive on
> "sw
.
>
> Things are getting better, but "L3-switches" pale in comparison to today's
> high-end routers on almost all fronts. If you take GigE out of the
> equation, modern "L3 Switches" are just as expensive as modern "core
> routers" - and routable, "mpls-able" L3 GE ports are _more_ expensive on
>
Funny I thought a "switch" was a multiport bridge... uses the MAC
headers to flood. ahh makes me long for the days of Kalpana.
Scott C. McGrath
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
> Thus spake "Daniel Golding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Hmm. Don't you just lov
Thus spake "Daniel Golding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hmm. Don't you just love it when folks say things like "Layer 3 Switches
are
> better than routers". Its very illuminating as to clue level.
>
> I suppose what they were trying to say, is that products that were
designed
> as switches, but are now
