Correct, not yet On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Livio Zanol Puppim < [email protected]> wrote:
> Neus 2000 does not have FCoE. > > 2010/2/9 Manu Chao <[email protected]> > > Two key advantages: >> - Technical: FCoE, vPC >> - Management: you needn't to manage N2Ks >> >> R/ >> Manu >> >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Livio Zanol Puppim < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yeah, You are right. >>> >>> But I would like to use my nexus 5000 10GE/FCoE ports just for access >>> servers, maximizing it's use... The uplinks from Nexus 2000 could >>> easially >>> go directly to my distribution/core. Unfortunally, nexus 2000 is just an >>> fabric extender and can ONLY be attached to Nexus 5000... Maybe CISCO >>> changes it's later... >>> >>> Let's think: >>> >>> 10 nexus 2000 using all uplink ports = 40 ports. Yes, 40 ports that I >>> must >>> use at my nexus 5000. That's more than 1 entirelly switch (1RU) and >>> almost 1 >>> switch (2RU). >>> >>> I haven't figure out yet what's the advantage of having this design >>> (nexus >>> 2000 -> nexus 5000) other than the "old" one (catalyst 4948 -> nexus >>> 7000/cisco 6500). That's what I'm talking about. >>> >>> The only REAL advantage so far is the vPC... >>> >>> 2010/2/2 Brad Hedlund <[email protected]> >>> >>> > >>> > True, the Nexus 2000 does not locally switch, but lets explore that for >>> a >>> > second... >>> > >>> > 1) a typical enterprise Data Center is running applications that are >>> not >>> > latency sensitive, where latencies in the 10s of microseconds are >>> perfectly >>> > OK and nobody is really counting anyway. Only in the small minority of >>> Data >>> > Centers running high frequency trading, grid computing, or some other >>> ultra >>> > low latency application, every *nanosecond* matters and local switching >>> with >>> > fewer hops is of paramount importance. Furthermore, these applications >>> are >>> > quickly migrating away from 1GE to 10GE attached servers for the >>> obvious low >>> > latency advantages. >>> > >>> > 2) the Nexus 2000 has 4x10GE uplink bandwidth versus the 2x10GE uplink >>> for >>> > 4948. This results in a possible 1:1.2 oversubscription ratio for >>> Nexus >>> > 2000 to handle the additional uplink load that may otherwise not be >>> present >>> > on a 4948. >>> > >>> > 3) The upstream Nexus 5000 implements cut-through switching, and the >>> Nexus >>> > 2000 itself also uses cut-through for frames entering on 1GE and >>> egressing >>> > on 10GE. The two combined often results in port-to-port latencies >>> similar >>> > to a Catalyst 6500, even without the "local switching". If you are >>> > comfortable with your Catalyst 6500 local switching latencies, you can >>> > expect similar performance from a Nexus 2000/5000 combination. >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Brad Hedlund, CCIE #5530 >>> > Consulting Systems Engineer, Data Center >>> > [email protected] >>> > http://www.internetworkexpert.org >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Jan 31, 2010, at 5:25 PM, David Hughes wrote: >>> > >>> > > >>> > > On 29/01/2010, at 6:54 AM, Livio Zanol Puppim wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> Can anyone please tell me the advantages of using Nexus 2000 over >>> > Catalyst >>> > >> 4948 as access layers switches? >>> > >> Using Nexus 2000, I have to use at least 2 ports at my Nexus 5000, >>> that >>> > >> could be used by servers with 10GbE/FCoE servers. >>> > > >>> > > The N2K does no local switching so if you have any east-west traffic >>> > between ports on the same switch you'll be better served by a more >>> > "traditional" access switch. Naturally the N2K offers centralised >>> > management etc etc but that may or may not be of interest depending on >>> the >>> > size of your deployment. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > David >>> > > ... >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >>> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>> > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> -- >>> []'s >>> >>> Lívio Zanol Puppim >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >>> >> >> > > > -- > []'s > > Lívio Zanol Puppim > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
