Now we're talking. Replies later 2010/2/12 <[email protected]>
> Given the pricing, I'd be more concerned about "losing ports" on the Nexus > 7000 than on the 5000. > > > A modest Nexus 7010 (two sups, four 32-port cards, two power supplies, LAN > software license) lists for just under US$400,000 using bundle pricing. > > That gets you 128 10Gb/s ports, oversubscribed 4:1. > > So, US$3125 per port (US$12,500 per non-blocking port). > > Those ports don't support the inexpensive twinax cables, so add another > US$3,600 to put SR optics on both ends of each link. > > The Nexus 5000 OTOH lists for about US$40,000 (dual power 5020 with 40 > ports and base license). US$1,000 per non-blocking port. And these ports > support the twinax cables ($150-$250 / cable) > > With optics (on both ends), N7K: $6,700 to $15,100 per port. > With twinax cables, N5K: $1,200 per port. > > And the N5K pricing gets even better when you price the bundle option with > 6 2148Ts, optics and twinax cables. > > If you have a requirement for several hundred 1Gb/s ports with no > oversubscription through the core, then the 5K might not be any help. > > /chris > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Livio Zanol Puppim > Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 10:38 AM > To: Tony Varriale > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 2000 vs Catalyst 4948 for access layer > > Ok... > > Let's try again, more simplyfied. > > Using a DC topology with Nexus family, I must have, for gigabit > connectivity, Nexus 2000 -> Nexus 5000 -> Nexus 7000. > > Using traditional way I can have Catalyst 4948 -> Nexus 7000, saving 10G > ports from Nexus 5000 for access. > > That's my only problem, loosing ports com 5000... Is it clear enought? > > Can you give me a good reason to use the first design? > > 2010/2/12 Tony Varriale <[email protected]> > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Livio Zanol Puppim" < > >> [email protected]> > >> To: "Jason Plank" <[email protected]> > >> Cc: "Cisco NSP ((E-mail))'" <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 7:18 PM > >> > >> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 2000 vs Catalyst 4948 for access layer > >> > >> > > Brad, > >> > >> Can't I make "the cloud" with traditional switches (4948 for example)? > >> > > > > You can call it what you'd like. > > > > > > As I've said before, my only concern is that I'll loose A LOT of access > >> ports > >> on Nexus 5000 that could be used by servers with 10GE/FCoE. > >> > > > > Ok, maybe I missed something. What are you trying to do? High density 1 > > gig? 5k does that (with 2k). Cheap and layer 2 high density 10g? 5k > does > > that. > > > > > > I'm expecting that 10G(with FCoE) will dominate the servers design, so > my > >> loss will be huge. > >> > > > > It will be a large part of the future, no doubt. Your loss? > > > > > > f Nexux 2000 could be attached directly to an Nexus 7000 (it is not > quite > >> dfficult to make that works) the deisgn would perfect fit for our needs. > >> > > > > As I've stated before, there is no if. Not sure how many more times I > have > > to say it... > > > > tv > > _______________________________________________ > > 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/
