On Jan 4, 2011, at 11:58 AM, "Keegan Holley" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Alan Buxey <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi, Have you looked at the 2960S series? �I am doing some testing with them and I'm pleased with them as a middle step before the 3750. �They are built on the 2960 which is more reliable than the 2970 was and they are stackable as well, although 10G and not 64/128G like the 3750. for their purpose, 3750e are being used. we are using 2960s but at the access layer (slowly getting rid of 2950 and pre-S 2960 edge switches). 2960S is quite limited really - only 4 can be members of the stack, the stack is only 10G, the interfacing options are weaker and they dont have the suite of security features that the 3750E/3750X offer...hence why we're 3750e/X at the distribution. ...we are also quite eager for the latest IOS for the 2960S as they have plenty of issues that need ironing out ;-) It sounded like you had gone from 2970's all the way to 3750's. The 2970's are heavily over subscribed and not stackable. The 2960s seemed like a good replacement since it is stackable and I believe less oversubscribed than the 2970. Can you elaborate on some of the bugs you've encountered with the 2960S? All I've tested so far is vanilla layer-2 with etherchannel uplinks, so I haven't found much. Default route bug if you decide to enable the 16 static routes. Current workaround is 'ip route 0.0.0.0 128.0.0.0 next hop' 'ip route 128.0.0.0 128.0.0.0 next hop'. Not sure how that one squeaked by QA. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
