Re: OT: Cisco NEXUS 7k vs Catalyst 6509E

The one feature we did really like when we looked at ACE was the
virtualization. Unfortunately, the rest wasn't enough to unseat F5. We
definately gave Cisco a chance though since we were talking about a
greenfield data center.

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 1:35 PM, --Hammer-- <bhmccie_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Ryan,
> Based on some of your previous threads, I don't think I would classify
> you as ignorant. :) Either way, you hit exactly on what I was subtly
driving
> at. Even with the versatility of the class-maps in the IOS looking ACE
> configuration, it's not on par with F5 or NetScaler. I just was curious
from
> Michael if they had come to the same conclusions. The one positive spin you
> can put on the ACE is virtualization. Being able to break everything into
> contexts has been nice. But the performance and feature limitations are
just
> a few too many years behind the other more dedicated appliance folks.
>
> --Hammer--
>
>
> On 8/12/2010 1:13 PM, Ryan West wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* --Hammer-- [mailto:bhmccie_at_gmail.com <bhmccie_at_gmail.com>]
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:10 PM
> *To:* Michael Marvel
> *Cc:* Ryan West; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> *Subject:* Re: OT: Cisco NEXUS 7k vs Catalyst 6509E
>
>
>
> Good stuff Michael. Thanks a lot. You didn't go with the 4710s for load
> balancing. Was the feature set not there? Just an observation that you
> trended away from Cisco for that component.
>
>
>
> --Hammer--
>
>
>
> Pardon my ignorance on the Cisco ACE, but what is their equivalent to
> iRules. With 10.x you can finally get a VRF like concept on the F5s with
> route domains, although you wouldnt get distinct layers of administrative
> control.
>
>
>
> -ryan

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Thu Aug 12 2010 - 13:45:24 ART