On Sun, 21 Feb 2010, TCIS List Acct wrote:
We've got a boatload of 3550-EMI's (for colo/server aggregation duties) and are looking at replacing them in the next 12-24 months The C3750G-24/48-E series seem to be a good upgrade path (all gig ports, layer3 routing, IPv6 support, fairly easy to source on the used market) -- curious as to why you said they didn't look viable...
I haven't played with the 3750 line, but assuming it's similar in software to the 3560, the trouble with them (vs the 3550), particularly in a colo/server aggregation setup, is a serious lack of flexibility in per-port policing.
With the 3550, you can use input/output service-policy to police each port to arbitrary bandwidh. If you want to limit a customer to 2mbit/s in both directions, it's trivial to do.
With the newer switches, cisco no longer supports per-port egress policing. Instead, you have srr-queue bandwidth limit [10-90], which limits the egress port speed to 10-90% of physical speed. i.e. srr-queue bandwidth 10 on a 100mbit port results in 10mbit/s. That would be the lowest "policed" rate you can configure for egress. If you can live with that, then it's not so bad, because you can come up with the %'s for all the other rates you'd want to limit ports to.
Also, because the egress bandwidth limit is configured for the "whole port" you can't use service-policy and ACLs to police some traffic but not other, or police certain types of traffic to different rates on the same port.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
