Re: OT: interface HundredGigE0/2/0/0

You're right... Looks like their "extender" does local switching, which is why
it's a more expensive solution (and quite frankly, a better architecture).

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 8, 2012, at 5:57 PM, "N. Max Pierson" <nmaxpierson_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> While there are some good facts about both products, I don't believe the
QFX3500 should be compared to the 2k FEX at all. In fact, it's more comparable
to a 5k if anything. As the article points out, the FEX is just a bunch of
ports added to the X-bar fabric of the 5k. And I also wouldn't go as far as
saying it's like a line card because it has it's own power supplies and can
be uplinked by separate 5K's. Here's a good example of how the FEX can be
deployed via vPC ... which is what we are doing in our DC right now ...
>
>
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus5000/sw/mkt_ops_guid
es/513_n1_1/n5k_enhanced_vpc.pdf
>
> I haven't personally used or seen the QFabric products in action, but I do
not believe Juniper has an extender like the 2k ... which is why it's more
expensive and hence the over subscription which means the FEX is much cheaper.
Someone please correct me if i'm wrong.
>
> So far, we love the path Cisco is going with the Nexus lineup! We hope to
soon eliminate as many 9148's as possible.
>
> Regards,
> Max
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Ronnie Angello <ronnie.angello_at_gmail.com>
wrote:
> Good info... Sounds like a fun project to be working on. I'll just add
that
> the 7K supports FEX as well, and also on a much larger scale than the 5K.
>
> Pretty good post below comparing the two architectures... I have a better
> understanding now. The oversubscription that they were referring to is
with
> the 10GE FEX (2232). That makes sense... you have 32x host ports and 8x
> fabric ports (4:1).
>
> We (Joseph and I) were initially talking about the oversubscription of the
7K
> line cards.
>
>
http://m.zimbio.com/Cisco+Systems+Inc./articles/n000mxz81Fm/Cisco+Nexus+2000+
> FEX+Vs+Juniper+QFabric+QFX3500
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:55 AM, Mike Johnson <mtb.mikej_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not an expert on Juniper, but just a comment on cost... for small
> installations QFabric is expensive. The fabric interconnect is not cheap.
> However, we are doing a comparative design study between Nexus and QFabric
for
> a new computer room of 100 cabinets - 3200 10G unified ports. Juniper is
> significantly cheaper. It's possible we have a better discount with
Juniper
> than with Cisco, but I don't think that's the major difference.
> >
> > QFabric is basically the same a Nexus 5K/2K fabric extension on a much
> larger scale. Just like you wouldn't generally build a data center using
only
> 5K/2K, you wouldn't build a data center with only QFabric. You want the
big
> beefy routers (7K or MX) to things like MPLS, L2 interconnects, etc.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Ronnie Angello <ronnie.angello_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I also hear that QF is an extremely expensive solution...
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Jun 7, 2012, at 9:29 AM, Ronnie Angello <ronnie.angello_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know much about QFabric, other than next to no one has
implemented
> it in production. I'm not even sure of what the use case would be. It's
also
> a very proprietary solution... I don't know anything about the
architecture
> of the underlying switches, so can't comment there. There are tons of blog
> posts out there that dive deeper into it than I care to go.
> > >
> > > Nexus is a proven, widely deployed architecture, and I can think of
tons
> of use cases. There's FabricPath, which is a prestandard version of TRILL,
> but TRILL will be supported once standardized. Not to mention that the
same
> platform does FCoE, MPLS, OTV, etc.
> > >
> > > Not sure what they're referring to about oversubscription. It depends
on
> the configuration. There are some oversubscribed line cards, but you can
now
> get up to 768 line rate 10GE ports with Fab 2s and F2 line cards.
> > >
> > > Ronnie
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > On Jun 7, 2012, at 8:59 AM, Jay McMickle <jay.mcmickle_at_yahoo.com>
wrote:
> > >
> > >> We attended a Juniper lunch and learn yesterday. They were very
insistent
> about not performing this type of over subscription. They were pushing
> QFabric, but they mentioned it on other other switches. For those that
don't
> know me, I bleed Cisco, and I'm just trying to learn along the way, so
don't
> judge me for the Juniper question!
> > >>
> > >> Anyone have an opinion on Juniper versus Cisco on the topic
subscription
> and backplane (Nexus versus QFabric).
> > >>
> > >> If you don't know- don't speak. Granted this is a Cisco CCIE GS, but
we
> should know what we're up against when speaking to customers.
> > >>
> > >> I've got Olive and learning along the way.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers!
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> Jay McMickle- CCIE #35355 (R&S)
> > >> Sent from iJay
> > >>
> > >> On Jun 7, 2012, at 3:51 AM, "Joseph L. Brunner"
<joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Knowing Cisco's Nexus model - it will be a 100Gig transceiver
connected
> to the backplane on 2 x 20Gb channels :)
> > >>>
> > >>> Or every 4 of them will share one 100Gbps backplane connection :)
> > >>>
> > >>> LOL
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Jazz Sunn
> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 9:09 PM
> > >>> To: Cisco certification
> > >>> Subject: interface HundredGigE0/2/0/0
> > >>>
> > >>> https://imgur.com/a/6eIDp
> > >>>
> > >>> Awesome!
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > >>>
> > >>>
Received on Fri Jun 08 2012 - 18:04:27 ART