[c-nsp] CE500 vs 2950?

[Ed Butler]

We looked at these for the same purpose, until we realised they don't
have a CLI. It's web-interface only. 

Regards,

Ed Butler
RapidSwitch Ltd
DDI: 020 7106 0731

RapidSwitch Ltd, 5th Floor, Sovereign House, 227 Marsh Wall, London, E14
9SD

This email message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains
information that may be confidential and/or copyright.  If you are not
the intended recipient please notify the sender by reply email and
immediately delete this email. Use, disclosure or reproduction of this
email by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly
prohibited. No representation is made that this email or any attachments
are free of viruses. Virus scanning is recommended and is the
responsibility of the recipient. 
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: 05 June 2006 16:56
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] CE500 vs 2950?

Hi,

We've always used the WS-C2950-24 as our L2 link aggregators in a
service provider environment, haven't done too much QoS, just trunk a
lot of customer VLANs through them to our L3 switching core.

I see there is a WS-CE500-24TT out now which is a little less expensive,
offers the same 10/100 ports as the 2950 plus a couple of 10/100/1000
uplinks, supports 802.1q trunking (albeit only 32 VLANs), and seems to
have a faster backplane.

Has anyone had experience with the CE-500's? Should I be looking to
these as the preferred alternative for new installs?

thanks for your input,
Adam


---
[This e-mail was scanned for viruses by our AntiVirus Protection System]

_______________________________________________
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/