From: Hank Yeomans (hyeomans@cox.net)
Date: Mon May 26 2008 - 02:02:37 ART
Well,
In my opinion it really depends, I was on a network with a bunch of 10 wide
trailers on a construction site and one trailer was the core/data center and
the network was such that a stack of 3750 switches was more than enough as a
core and using a 4500 was a waste and more power than the environment
needed. 2 3750G in a stack with 3750g-12s distribution to around 20 other
switches was more than enough for this environment. Anything else would
have been overkill based on the even the most liberal traffic patterns for
this place. You can't just get powerful switch just for the hell of it.
You gotta really 'right-size' the network to the situation and everyone of
them is different.
I guess if its long term and your talking 4 switches in a stack...ok...maybe
I guess for modularity....maybe.
Best regards,
Hank Yeomans
On 5/24/08 1:49 AM, "Paul Cosgrove" <paul.cosgrove@heanet.ie> wrote:
> Hi Tajamal,
>
> Would also be worth mentioning the 3750E if you do require 10G
> connectivity (such as the Sup6E).
>
> 3750E's have a 128Gbps switching fabric, with up to 101Mpps forwarding
> rate.
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps7077/product_data
> _sheet0900aecd805bbe67.html
>
> The 6E is capable of 320Gbps in a 4510 chassis, but smaller chassis are
> not able to utilise that performance, e.g. the 4503 with a 6E is capable
> of 136Gbps and 102 Mpps.
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/modules/ps2797/ps9294/product_data_
> sheet0900aecd806df543_ps4324_Products_Data_Sheet.html
>
> A cisco contact recommended stacked 3750s instead of buying a 4500 to me
> a couple of years ago. Wasn't much difference in terms of performance
> as I recall (3750 may even have been higher) and 3750 stacking allowed
> for greater flexibility than the set number of slots in a 4500. That
> was before the 6E and 3750E of course.
>
> If you expect to have a very high port density then a large 4500-E with
> a 6E will provide higher performance and perhaps that is your primary
> concern. If you are comparing a smaller 4503E and a 3750E stack, then
> they both have similar performance and you can expand the 3750E stack to
> a higher number of ports by adding more switches to the stack. In
> addition, if one of those switches dies, the rest of the stack remains
> functional. If you need similar resilience on the 4500E you will need
> to buy a larger chassis and factor in a duplicate SUP and linecards.
>
> Paul.
>
> Salau, Yemi wrote:
>> 3750 at the core of a network?
>>
>> When you're at the core, then you're talking high-speed switching backbone
>> and should be designed to switch packets as fast(est) as possible.
>>
>> So, I will base my decision on, first, backplane speed/throughput, and then
>> on cost.
>>
>> What's the maximum backplane speed out of a 3750? & what's the maximum
>> backplane speed out of a 4500? Assuming the level of setup of stackable 3750s
>> cost the same as the 4500 you're putting in?
>>
>> Sup6E on 4500 can push bandwidth/throughput up to 320Gbps/250mpps with a
>> linecard speed of 6Gbps.
>> Whereas 3750G has forwarding rate of 38.7mpps or something using 32Gbps
>> high-speed stacking bus on a stack(stackwise) interconnect technology.
>>
>> I'm sure there will be other comparisons, but in my own personal opinion, I
>> will pick 4500 over 3750 for core based on speed factor alone. Obviously
>> other issues like size of the campus network you're dealing comes into
>> factor, cost, etc. You sometimes don't have to buy a Ferrari for a job which
>> FiatPunto can do, but I'm sure the design guys will not be too happy with you
>> putting in 3750(traditionally a distribution/access switch) permanently at
>> the core, at least the ones I work with would most def not approve such
>> design.
>>
>> Many Thanks
>>
>> Yemi Salau
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com on behalf of Tajamal Shah
>> Sent: Fri 23/05/2008 20:36
>> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: RE: CCIE# 20863
>>
>>
>>
>> Chaps, need your help, I can't decide.....
>>
>> Is there any advantage in using 4500 switch over stack of 3750 switches at
>> the core of a network?
>>
>> appreciate your input.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Tajamal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2008 - 06:59:18 ART