68xx series we were told to look at other option via our channel. -----Original Message----- From: cisco-nsp <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Charles Spurgeon Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 10:05 AM To: Eli Kagan <[email protected]> Cc: Cisco Network Service Providers <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] cat6800 sup6T
WARNING:This email originated outside of St. Luke’s email system. DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. ______________________________________________________________________ > Need your opinion on choosing a switch for an upgrade. I got a bunch > of cat4507 sup7-e running right now thatneed to be replaced very soon. > I can't seem to pick the right platform to replace it with. Cisco is > being as confusing as always. My requirements are pretty bland. The > switch has to be highly reliable (banking environment), mature code > and hardware. Should not end up with no more software updates in the > next 5 years (PCI compliance). Should do VRFs, MACsec, VPC or VSS > (quad sup VSS is better). No 10Gig is required as of today. My > options so far: > > 1.Cat6807, sup6T -- > would be my first choice but other techies have no experience with it > and are reluctant to agree. > 2.Cat6506-E. sup2T -- 7 years old, perhaps will be EoL shortly otherwise will do. > 3. Cat4507R+E, sup9 -- good on paper but I had too manyhardware and software issues with the existing cat4500 for me to be comfortablewith this option. On top of that, Cisco is ???encouraging??? to go to Cat9400 instead > 4. Cat9400 7-slot -- I know nothing about that thing. Does it > support quad sup VSS or similar? Is it too cutting edge for a > financial client? Is the code stable enough? > 5. Nexus 7700 > 6-slot or Nexus 9504 -- both are expensive ashell. If you want 5 years of active support then you should probably consider the Catalyst 9000 series (NOT Nexus 9k and thanks for the model number confusion, Cisco). If you want multiple sups and slots then the Cat9400 would be the model of interest. However, note that the Cat9500 supports "stackwise virtual" which claims to be a VSS replacement. The Cat9ks are based on the second and third generation of the Cisco UADP ASIC which was first announced in the Cat3850 in 2013, so the architecture and code have some years on them: https://newsroom.cisco.com/press-release-content?articleId=1132715 While we have no operational experience with the Cat9k series as yet, we are currently testing them with our current Cat6k configs (so far, so good) and plan to be moving to them ASAP. We have stopped purchasing Cat6k gear. As to why we stopped purchasing Cat6k, you should check with your Cisco support channel on the hardware roadmap and EOL plans for the Catalyst Sup6t/68xx series. -Charles _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "This message is intended for the use of the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential or privileged, the disclosure of which is governed by applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message by error, please notify us immediately and destroy the related message." _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
