• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cisco: Catalyst + Blades VS Router

R

randal

Golden Member
Okay, so I'm in kind of a tizzy with my coworker here (he is much more seasoned than I) over how to approach an upcoming project. We're putting in two fractional DS3s (27 & 33mbps) and maybe 2 T1s to a single place. I say put in a decked out 7200 or a couple 3620s. His idea is to get a Catalyst 6500 and load it up with blades and run things through it.

I have not worked with any catalyst switches other than the 29xx series, and I am unfamiliar with their pros and cons. Is there any particular reason to use a loaded switch over a powerful router? I can't fathom that a switch + router card would be able to do the job as efficiently / compactly / cost-effectively as a dedicated router.

Thoughts, opinions?
randal
😀
 
Reason I have heard behind putting in a pretty powerful switch with a Router card would be to keep the Core a Core without a Router and putting the Frame Relay's and other WAN circuits on edge routers since the core shouldn't be concerned with WAN traffic.

Your overall Core bandwidth goes down with a Router is that is why if possible to buy a beefy Layer 3 switch is a possibility you can solve some bandwidth issues and make the core as quick as possible but it seems you are trying to get just one box to handle WAN traffic and Core LAN traffic so I would recommend then you may want to put in a beefy router instead of a switch.

Good luck
 
We use the WAN blades for the 6500's very frequently - They do a great job, especially with a Layer3 card in the switch. they are, in general, superior to a router for very high speed links. (Full DS3+) They have, in essence, the performance of a 7200 (if not greater) built in plus all the benefits of L3 switching. Just remember that the WAN blade takes two cards, and a 7200 can take up to 6 per chassis.

They are, however, VERY expensive. When I last checked, the cost of the 6500 WAN blade alone (with no network modules) was around the price of a 7200, NOT counting the switch chassis, power supplies, supervisor cards, line cards, etc. You're looking a cost of at least $100K for a 6500 with a WAN setup, probably more.

So, you're both right - The 6500 is the more elegant solution, but not cost effective and probably not necessary. I'd actually look at some of the later model 3600's or even the new 3700 - Some of them have the same routing capacity as the 7200's and will run a fractional DS3 very nicely. If you're going with the 3x00 range, get a 3x40, not a 3x20 - The price difference is pretty minimal compared to the extra expandability it gives you and the cost of adding another router in the future if you run out of ports.

- G
 
Garion's hit the nail on the head.

6500 with WAN blade is blistering fast, but expensive.
7200 is fast and reasonable cost.

One point is how much aggregation would you do on a 7200? Will you run out of LAN bandwidth if you're funneling multiple DS3s into a 100 Base-T interface?

More I think about it I like the 6500 idea.

-edit- just reread the original post. A 6500 will run circles around a 7200.
 
Thanks for all the input guys! I did a *lot* of reading about Cisco Catalysts and VIPs, RSMs, PAs, the whole shebang, and everything I could find about the 3700 series. Our requirements dropped a bit, and we're probably going to end up going with the 3745 because of the load of NM/WIC slots it has as well as the built in switching -- and it does some 225k pps, which should be fast enough.

Thanks for the input and the drive to learn new stuff!
randal
😀
 
well, the 6500s would probably have a slew of 100mbps ports and a few gigabits on there ... not to mention all the blades and their associated wan interfaces (ds0-oc12s, right?) ... they *have* to have some monster processing. Plus, for $100,000+, they should really perform ;-)

randal
😀
 
whoh there. 100K? there aren't many fully decked out 6500s that cost over 100K.

remember, demand at least 30% off retail on all cisco gear. 40% if you're good. 🙂
 
whoh there. 100K? there aren't many fully decked out 6500s that cost over 100K.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you have a loaded 6509, dual L3 sups, a couple of WAN blades with modules and throw in some gig cards and other line cards you can get up there pretty easily, especially if you go fabric enabled.

- G
 
True. But you really have to deck them out. Don't forget about the recent price breaks on 6500 gear.

Oh well. I still believe in building the network design first and then picking gear that fits the needs. Not the other way around.
 
Garion, Spidey:

You two are the only reason I might renew my subscription to AT forums. Know of any boards where this kind of higher-end networking talk is more common?

bart
 
Originally posted by: Buddha Bart
Garion, Spidey:

You two are the only reason I might renew my subscription to AT forums. Know of any boards where this kind of higher-end networking talk is more common?
Click to expand...

ditto

randal

 
Originally posted by: spidey07
True. But you really have to deck them out. Don't forget about the recent price breaks on 6500 gear.

Oh well. I still believe in building the network design first and then picking gear that fits the needs. Not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the best way to do it, unless you already have the gear you need to re-use or some other rocket scientist bought for their "design." Been there, done that.

To be honest, I really don't pay that much attention to prices anymore. We've got such a massive discount with Cisco that everything seems cheap, comparatively.. (No, don't ask how much - I can't tell)

- G



 
OH man, now he's gone & done it....whupped out the "triple dog dare"..... this is gonna hurt.....

Anyway...(this is mythical, of course, but we're working on a triple dogger here...)

My school uses Arcnet for the dorm network. I read somewhere that it's a token-passing-bus-based network that runs at one megabit. I need more bandwidth for the three machines I use for various games (simultaneously). I figure I maybe I can use some token's from IBM on the network so I can get control of the wire 16 times more often than the rest of the students. I put a Sniffer on the wire, and I'm seeing some tokens going by, but I haven't seen a bus yet ... I figure the analyzer just isn't rigged for it. SO I guess the question is: I know the IBM tokens are larger than the Arcnet one .... is there still gonna be room in the wire for the token to pass the bus, or are they just gonna be jammed up behind it? If they can't get by, will I be able to detect it by watching for a clot of tokens?



😀

Just kidding.




IBM tokens were too expensive. I got a bushel of Thomas Conrad tokens from NewEgg.com alot cheaper.










(Sorry for the OT......)

FWIW

Scott
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top