So I can get a juniper ex4300-48p   on newegg for 800 dollars less than the 
ex4300-48t from my vendor, both are new , both have the same specs , except the 
POE obviously


while I actually wont use the POE (because the heat it generates is way too 
much for the enclosed server cabinet), could there be any downside to getting 
this one?





I just cant justify the extra $$$




________________________________
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> on behalf 
of Kurt Buff <kurt.b...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 11:19 PM
To: ntsysadm
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] core suggestions was- VLAN dhcp issue Netgear GS748Tv5

Yep - I'd certainly prefer the EX4300. Press the vendor on their
reasoning, or just go with another vendor.

Kurt

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 6:40 AM, J- P <jnat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> the vendor has come back with this recommendation
> http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/switching/ex-series/ex3300/
[http://www.juniper.net/assets/img/video/video-joe-gibbs-racing.jpg]<http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/switching/ex-series/ex3300/>

EX3300 Ethernet Switch – Juniper 
Networks<http://www.juniper.net/us/en/products-services/switching/ex-series/ex3300/>
www.juniper.net
EX3300 Support for converged data, voice, and video. The EX3300 Ethernet Switch 
is a compact, scalable solution for demanding converged enterprise access 
environments.



>
> this seems (based on the model number) inferior to the EX4300 Kurt
> recommended,  and whats worse is that the vendor is asking 3000 USD , heck,
> Newegg has the ex4300 for less than that
> https://www.neweggbusiness.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIV03829M5844&nm_mc=KNC-GoogleBizMKPL-PC&cm_mmc=KNC-GoogleBizMKPL-PC-_-pla-_-Network+-+Switches-_-9SIV03829M5844&gclid=CIHh_qf6js8CFVNZhgodO-MOeA
>
> Unless I'm missing something, I don't see why anyone would choose the 3300
> over the 4300 considering the prices
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: kurt.b...@gmail.com
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:38:57 -0700
> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] core suggestions was- VLAN dhcp issue Netgear
> GS748Tv5
> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
>
> I'd take a hard look at a Juniper EX4300-48, but if money is a real sticking
> point, then look at the specs on an HP switch or a Ubiquiti.
>
> Kurt
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 3:21 PM, J- P <jnat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes lots of cad  Vectorworks  for the production  dept (15 users) amd lots
> of video editing, However, the video is done on a rendering pc, once.its
> completed ,  it goes back to the.synology
>
> ________________________________
> From: kurt.b...@gmail.com
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:00:15 -0700
> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] core suggestions was- VLAN dhcp issue Netgear
> GS748Tv5
> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
>
> Any CAD or video editing, or similar high-bandwidth data movers?
>
> If not, then most anything will work.
>
> Do you have a personal preference for any brand? That is, are you well
> experienced with a particular brand of switch, or are you relatively
> inexperienced with switches?
>
> If you have a preference, stick with it. If not, I'd suggest either HP or
> Ubiquiti.
>
> If the environment has big data movers, then check the backplane capacity
> for the various switches, and you might consider Juniper as well as HP or
> Ubiquiti.
>
> I'm becoming more a fan of Juniper all the time, but they aren't much like
> Cisco or HP.
>
> Cisco would be my last resort, because of price more than anything else -
> they're otherwise fine switches.
>
> Kurt
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:33 PM, J- P <jnat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Currently flat,
> 60 workstations, 60 phones, 12 printers
> 8 AP's,  about 12 poe door buzzers, pa's and they will be getting 12 ip
> cameras
>
> A couple of synology that have 4 1gb nic
>
> i site  to site
>
> 4 physical  servers, 2 of them hyperv   (hosting 4 vms each ) both servers
> have 4 1 gb nics,
>
> primary internet is 100mb
> backup internet is 25mb
>
> about 20 concurrent  remote  users
>
> ________________________________
> From: kurt.b...@gmail.com
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 14:09:50 -0700
> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] core suggestions was- VLAN dhcp issue Netgear
> GS748Tv5
> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
>
> How complex is the environment, how many staff are supported, how many
> VLANs, how much data moves across the LAN, what's the peak throughput, etc?
>
> Kurt
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 1:49 PM, J- P <jnat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Got approval  for new core,
>
> Im thinking  Cisco or Procurve ,
> givem that all other switches are netgear and only have 1gb  sfp uplink
> ports  does anyone have suggestions, opinions , reccomendations ?
>
> TiA
>
> ________________________________
> From: melvin.bac...@byers.com
> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
> Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] VLAN dhcp issue Netgear GS748Tv5
> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 18:23:04 +0000
>
> Core sort of implies layer 3.
>
> --
> There are 10 kinds of people in the world...
>          those who understand binary and those who don't.
>
> From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com]
> On Behalf Of J- P
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:17 PM
> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
> Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] VLAN dhcp issue Netgear GS748Tv5
>
> Hmm, hack, alternative ,  not words  i feel comfy with when its a core
> switch  -
>
> maybe  I'll  get them to buy something better
> ________________________________
> From: michealespin...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 22:50:37 -0700
> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] VLAN dhcp issue Netgear GS748Tv5
> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
> Its been a long time since I've come across an equipment situation like
> this, but I've seen it before. When planned for, its a way to spend less on
> your equipment.  Unfortunately, sometimes people get caught in a situation
> realizing the hard-way, that they are missing some expected functionality.
>
> As a last resort, I'd look into somehow hacking/activating the
> functionality.  Perhaps an alternate firmware can be forced on it.
>
>
> --
> Espi
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 6:53 PM, J- P <jnat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Looks like you hit the nail on the head, per this article i need either a
> 2nd switch, or use the firewall
>
> https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/26167971/Netgear-GS748T-setting-up-several-VLAN's-but-having-DHCP-broadcasting-across-all-ports.html
> ________________________________
> From: michealespin...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 17:16:10 -0700
> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] VLAN dhcp issue Netgear GS748Tv5
> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
> Hi J-P,
>
> I didnt really see a question in your initial post, but if I'm understanding
> your frustration correctly:  If there are no DHCP helper options, I dont see
> how this could work.  DHCP is a broadcast protocol, and needs a helper
> mechanism to cross networks.  I can only assume that this model is a
> lower-tiered option that is meant to be stacked with a higher-tiered managed
> switch.
>
> I saw a similarly themed question posted here:
>
> https://community.netgear.com/t5/Smart-Plus-Click-Switches/Why-have-none-of-Netgear-s-L2-switches-a-DHCP-relay-agent/td-p/500749
>
>
>
> --
> Espi
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 1:29 PM, J- P <jnat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Anyone, Bueller,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jean-Paul Natola
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: jnat...@hotmail.com
> To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
> Subject: [NTSysADM] VLAN dhcp issue Netgear GS748Tv5
> Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 19:47:11 -0400
> Hi all,
>
> I've been testing VLAN  on a GS748tv5  I emphasize v5  as netgear tends to
> create different devices and only differentiate them by the version ,  as a
> matter of fact this device does not have a "ip-helper, or  dhcp relay"
> options  (yes I know,  its old , and crappy anyway),
>
> So I created vlan5 , assigned it an IP 192.168.5.1 ,   added the firewall
> port and  test pc  port to the vlan and since I have no option for ip-helper
> or DHCP relay, the PC received no ip address (and yes, I did create the DHCP
> scope 192.168.5.x  on my 08r2 server, )
>
> If I give the pc a static address (i.e  192.168.5.x ) I can then
> successfully ping 192.168.5.1 , further research said to enable DHCP option
> 82 on the DHCP server;
> https://www.google.com/search?q=dhcp+option+82&ie=&oe=
>
> which of course doesn't exist in 08, so I tried to manually create option
> 82, still no joy-
>
> if anyone can share any thoughts it would be greatly appreciated
>
> and before anyone asks, there is no CLI, no Shell, no Terminal on this POS
> switch
>
>
>
> Jean-Paul Natola
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



Reply via email to