[c-nsp] Cisco Layer 3 Switch Recommendation

[Robert E.Seastrom]

The qualifications were specifically worded to include the 7505, the
72xx and the Juniper M20.  My recollection was that they were
something along the lines of:

   "In devices where the predominating slot orientation is horizontal,
   the capacity to accept two or more cards arrayed horizontally, or a
   carrier board that holds two or more cards arrayed horizontally, shall
   cause the device to be deemed a router".

Someone who cares more than I can go digging through the archives.

                                        ---Rob


Dave Temkin <dave at ordinaryworld.com> writes:

> And then the dinasours came and brought us the 7505 and 72xx and threw
> that theory out the window :-)
>
>
>
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Robert E.Seastrom wrote:
>
>>
>> Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> writes:
>>
>> > ok, i gotta ask.  'switches' do layers 3 & 4 (bgp, ...).  'routers
>> > do layer 2 (atm, atmv2, ...).  so what is the technical difference
>> > between a router and a switch?
>>
>> Didn't we have this discussion on nanog-l some time back (precipitated
>> by the 6500/7600 paradox), and agree with some qualifications
>> involving daughtercards and carrier boards that routers had vertical
>> card slots while switches had horizontal card slots?
>>
>> :)
>>
>>                                         ---Rob
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>