Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??
-
Is it an L3 switch? Yes. Is it what people normally mean? No. What they are telling you is that the performance of the L3 routing is so slow that while it is there, it is not fast enough for most people to consider it an L3 switch. The purpose of the routing is to replace the need for an external router for people using VLANs, rather than doing full on L3 switching.
Tecnically, anything with three or more ports and doing L3 routing is an L3 switch (because a switch is just telling us it is more than two ports) but it is generally accepted that switch implies a certain speed (no stated speed, just "fast" by whatever random standard people make up at the time) and they aren't labeling this an L3 switch to keep people from being upset about the slow speed.
-
@scottalanmiller
The question then is such: for routing across VLANs is this switch "adequate" (aka good enough) vs a switch that is adverstised as a Layer-3 switch? -
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller
The question then is such: for routing across VLANs is this switch "adequate" (aka good enough) vs a switch that is adverstised as a Layer-3 switch?You'd be better purchasing a proper L3 switch.
-
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller
The question then is such: for routing across VLANs is this switch "adequate" (aka good enough) vs a switch that is adverstised as a Layer-3 switch?Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
-
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller
The question then is such: for routing across VLANs is this switch "adequate" (aka good enough) vs a switch that is adverstised as a Layer-3 switch?You'd be better purchasing a proper L3 switch.
Why?
-
Instead of making decisions based on a single line of high level marking for the top of a product page, why don't you look at the data sheet?
The software specs start on page 10.
https://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/edgemax/EdgeSwitch_DS.pdf
-
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company) -
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller
The question then is such: for routing across VLANs is this switch "adequate" (aka good enough) vs a switch that is adverstised as a Layer-3 switch?You'd be better purchasing a proper L3 switch.
Why?
Going off of what you just said, if the equipment is slower than any other L3 switch, why use it?
-
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller
The question then is such: for routing across VLANs is this switch "adequate" (aka good enough) vs a switch that is adverstised as a Layer-3 switch?You'd be better purchasing a proper L3 switch.
Why?
Going off of what you just said, if the equipment is slower than any other L3 switch, why use it?
Because it is cheaper.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller
The question then is such: for routing across VLANs is this switch "adequate" (aka good enough) vs a switch that is adverstised as a Layer-3 switch?You'd be better purchasing a proper L3 switch.
Why?
Going off of what you just said, if the equipment is slower than any other L3 switch, why use it?
Because it is cheaper.
You get my point, right? I mean come on. . .
I haven't had enough coffee for this today.
-
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company)Sure, but what's the purpose of those? How enormous is this environment that you want separate networks, but tied together?
-
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@dustinb3403 said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller
The question then is such: for routing across VLANs is this switch "adequate" (aka good enough) vs a switch that is adverstised as a Layer-3 switch?You'd be better purchasing a proper L3 switch.
Why?
Going off of what you just said, if the equipment is slower than any other L3 switch, why use it?
Because it is cheaper.
You get my point, right? I mean come on. . .
I haven't had enough coffee for this today.
No, I don't at all get your point. What would justify spending lots of extra money to get faster L3 routing? There are cases where that would matter, sure. But not many.
You don't just buy the fastest gear you can get, you get what makes sense for your business case. And for most companies, L2 switches make way more sense.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company)Sure, but what's the purpose of those? How enormous is this environment that you want separate networks, but tied together?
It's not about size, it's more of a legal requirement.
-
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company)Sure, but what's the purpose of those? How enormous is this environment that you want separate networks, but tied together?
It's not about size, it's more of a legal requirement.
All the more reason to actually have those networks separated.
IF the switch can do ACLs, then I suppose you could get what you wanted for this requirement.
-
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company)Sure, but what's the purpose of those? How enormous is this environment that you want separate networks, but tied together?
It's not about size, it's more of a legal requirement.
What legal requirement is met by not separating the networks, though?
-
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company)Sure, but what's the purpose of those? How enormous is this environment that you want separate networks, but tied together?
It's not about size, it's more of a legal requirement.
Scott - see, right here he tells you it's about legal requirement to be separate.
-
@dashrender said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company)Sure, but what's the purpose of those? How enormous is this environment that you want separate networks, but tied together?
It's not about size, it's more of a legal requirement.
Scott - see, right here he tells you it's about legal requirement to be separate.
Now your claim is that using L3 is not separating them... assuming no ACL, I'd agree.
-
@dashrender said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company)Sure, but what's the purpose of those? How enormous is this environment that you want separate networks, but tied together?
It's not about size, it's more of a legal requirement.
Scott - see, right here he tells you it's about legal requirement to be separate.
No, he said he wants to tie them together .... not separate, that's the entire purpose of this thread. He's asking how to end the existing separation. Nowhere did he say anything that suggested what you just implied. But he did imply the exact opposite.
-
@dashrender said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@dashrender said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@fateknollogee said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
@scottalanmiller said in Edgeswitch: Layer-3 or not??:
Sure, it'll work fine. Of course, one always has to ask, if you have VLANs, why do you want to route between them? Doesn't that mostly defeat the purpose for having VLANs?
Good question, I mentioned VLANs since you had mentioned it previously.
But the routing could be across different subnets (or different sub-companies within a parent company)Sure, but what's the purpose of those? How enormous is this environment that you want separate networks, but tied together?
It's not about size, it's more of a legal requirement.
Scott - see, right here he tells you it's about legal requirement to be separate.
Now your claim is that using L3 is not separating them... assuming no ACL, I'd agree.
They are 100% separate without L3 (assuming he keeps the VLANs.) Any addition of L3 means tying together - dropping the separtion. Even if he adds ACLs, it's still moving from totally separate to at least partially merged.
-
So here's a question for the OP - What is the goal?
It's stated that you need these separate for legal reasons, then why do these networks need to be talking to each other via L3 on a switch?
