[c-nsp] ASIC to switch port mapping

[Chris Evans]

IMHO the 3750/3560 series are way overpriced and underperforming switches.
I'd honestly give the Juniper EX4200 series a look if you're looking for a
direct class comparison, but looking for better performance at a lower cost.
Our Cisco HTTS engineers have directly come out and said that they will not
support 3750/3560 switches for data center usage in our environment. Cat4948
is the platform to choose if you're looking for a 1RU footprint stand alone
unit.

Cat4948 vs N5K is a non-comparison. That's talking apples to oranges in
regards are you comparing a L2/L3 copper GigE switch with 10Gig uplink
capability (depending on model) vs a purely L2 switch that can do Copper
GigE with Fabric extenders (minus the few onboard ports that can do GigE on
5K chassis itself).. Depending on the count of devices that you need, the
N5K solution is waaay more expensive. Not to mention it doesn't do L3 until
the Nexus 5500 series comes out later this year and only when enabled in
software Q1 of next year. The N5K being a cut-through switch with VoQ
doesn't have large buffers either. They use those features to make big
buffers not much of a necessity, but there is always going to be that
multiple in single out issue. It's just easier with the 5K as you can throw
more bandwidth at it with VPC/port-channels and its large hashing bucket
capability.

To put it simply, these platforms service different requirements, but
overlap in ways.

On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Peter Rathlev <peter at rathlev.dk> wrote:

> (I assume the response was to this or similar)
>
> On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 13:43 +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
> > Cisco does not think that this is a problem, and I have been told that
> > the new generation 2960S and 3560E have the same size buffers.
>
> On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 08:26 -0400, Chris Evans wrote:
> > They are closet switches. If you need bigger buffers get a platform
> > meant for heavier use such as the 4948.
>
> We've heard Cisco use that argument, and it's hilarious. The problem is
> _also_ there in the closets. Even end user PCs actually need bandwidth.
>
> We currently use 3750 and 3560E models in our datacenters, based on a
> recommendation from the (AFAIK) largest gold partner in our country.
> When whining about the buffer problem, everybody says "Nexus 5k" and a
> few say 4948.
>
> Seriously: Is it okay for Cisco to sell handicapped "closet" switches?
> It's not like they're cheap compared to others vendors or previous
> comparable Cisco switches (3550/2950/2970).
>
> --
> Peter
>
>
>