> > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 13:42:43 -0500 > From: "Jason Gurtz" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: [c-nsp] 4900M vs. 4503 for core > Message-ID: > <a92eaf652ec423438d55c14c60771c8701f3e...@exchgsrv.nputilities.local > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > We are doing a long overdue redesign of our network as part of a voip > implementation, hopefully ending up with a collapsed core w/routed access > layer. A consultant has proposed the 4507 as access switches and a pair > of 3750-E switches as the core. The 3750-E seems a strange choice to me > for a few reasons and I'm thinking a pair of 4900M or 4503 switches would > be a better fit looking forward. > > We are a smaller shop (7 access switches including the datacenter) with > 100Mb desktops and a mix of 100/1000 for servers. Switch-to-switch trunks > are 1Gb. The number of access switches is very unlikely to change and we > could, in the future move to a 10Gb. The 4900M solution would save a > non-trivial amount over 4503 with Sup6. > > Is there anything glaringly wrong with choosing the 4900M using twin-gig > based connections to the access layer over the 4503 Sup6 and 46xx line > cards in our situation? > > ~Jason > > > What the 3750Gs - I would pick the "G" over the E/10GB until you need 10 GB ... the price will have dropped by then - is an clustered switch stack that you can run redundant etherchannels to ; one link to one 3750, one link to the other.
Yes, yes, yes ... if you have to reboot the 3750 stack you lose all connectivity as both ( or more ) members reboot. It switches, it routes , it port channels. jumbo frames, teaming, .... Save your money until you need [ unless you are going to run 10GB to 10GB links where a single client to server connection will exceed 1 GB you can just as easily port channel a bunch of 1 GB links and get almost the same effect. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
