Do I Need A Layer 3 Core Switch?
-
I've never been responsible for a network that was large enough to have a core switch.
I have a HP 2824 (L3 switch) 1 GB switch with 4 ports that will take GBICs that I use for fiber.
connected to that I have two 2650-PWR switches for phones and endpoints.
I am planning on upgrading the 2824 to a UBNT Edgeswitch 48 which has two SPF +1 ports (10 Gbe) and two SPF 1 ports (1 Gb fiber)
I will eventually replace the 2650-pwr with 1 Gb switches in the future.
-
For the TOR switches for all my servers and virtual hosts and NAS, I am looking at using 2 of the Extreme Summit X460-G2-24t-10GE4. 24 ports of copper 1Gb and 4 ports of 10GE SPF+ and additional stacking ports on the back. For the edge switches for things like the access points, IP phones and desktops, I was looking at the Extreme Summit X450-G2-48P-10GE4 or the Extreme Summit X450-G2-48P-GE4.
-
wow, $3800/ea for the TOR switches...
-
Yeah, that is kind of why I was asking. Is this enough to warrant the consideration of something designed to be a core?
-
@Dashrender Don't forget to add the PSU(s)
-
I suppose that I could always get the TOR and Edge switches first and see how well it works and if I need to get better throughput from the LAN to the WIFI and vice versa, then I could add the "core" switch into the mix. Anyone have thoughts on this?
-
Not that it means anything - but I've never heard of Extreme Summit.
Any reason not to find a solution that has six 10 Gbe ports on a single switch?
-
@Dashrender said:
Not that it means anything - but I've never heard of Extreme Summit.
Not SMB gear. It's good stuff. Way better than Cisco.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Not that it means anything - but I've never heard of Extreme Summit.
Not SMB gear. It's good stuff. Way better than Cisco.
What the deciding line when you move from, for lack of a better term, SMB stuff to - Way better than Cisco stuff?
-
@Dashrender Redundancy and I am almost positive that the switches that have more than 4 ports of SPF+ cost more than double. I think at that point you are looking at a core type switch.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Not that it means anything - but I've never heard of Extreme Summit.
Not SMB gear. It's good stuff. Way better than Cisco.
What the deciding line when you move from, for lack of a better term, SMB stuff to - Way better than Cisco stuff?
LOL, well if it is designed for large businesses or if it is "making due" equipment with lack of support, features, performance, etc. Cisco walks an odd line of having both enterprise gear and hobbyist crap and just horrible prices and rarely very good. Value is low, even when the quality is there.
It's hard to exactly describe a line, but it is pretty clear when you look at companies. Juniper, Adtran, Extreme, Palo Alto are enterprise gear. They expect network engineers to be involved.
Netgear, D-Link, Ubiquiti, etc. don't expect network engineers and are built for companies that need a bit less. Doesn't mean it is bad, it's just not meant for the same audience.
Some, like Dell and HP ride the line, leaning towards enterprise. But you'd see them in both places.
Similar to mini computers, you don't see them in the SMB. It's kind of commodity versus non-commodity.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Not that it means anything - but I've never heard of Extreme Summit.
Not SMB gear. It's good stuff. Way better than Cisco.
What the deciding line when you move from, for lack of a better term, SMB stuff to - Way better than Cisco stuff?
LOL, well if it is designed for large businesses or if it is "making due" equipment with lack of support, features, performance, etc. Cisco walks an odd line of having both enterprise gear and hobbyist crap and just horrible prices and rarely very good. Value is low, even when the quality is there.
It's hard to exactly describe a line, but it is pretty clear when you look at companies. Juniper, Adtran, Extreme, Palo Alto are enterprise gear. They expect network engineers to be involved.
Netgear, D-Link, Ubiquiti, etc. don't expect network engineers and are built for companies that need a bit less. Doesn't mean it is bad, it's just not meant for the same audience.
Some, like Dell and HP ride the line, leaning towards enterprise. But you'd see them in both places.
Similar to mini computers, you don't see them in the SMB. It's kind of commodity versus non-commodity.
Interesting that you would include Adtran in the enterprise side of things. I knew very little about them before my time here and I am not saying they aren't enterprise, I just never knew they would be lumped in with Juniper and the like.
I like the ease of use in terms of the web gui but I have had to replace both of mine due to dead ports.
-
@wrx7m said:
Interesting that you would include Adtran in the enterprise side of things. I knew very little about them before my time here and I am not saying they aren't enterprise, I just never knew they would be lumped in with Juniper and the like.
Well, above Cisco for sure
-
Maybe the same build quality, but way better value
Adtran is often listed as one of those secrets of network engineers. They made the high end equipment for a lot of rebranders.
-
@scottalanmiller Interesting. I had not heard that before. Maybe I should give them a second look?
-
Definitely worth considering. Extreme is great stuff too.
-
I will check them out. Thanks for the suggestions.
-
Maybe this is a better question, Should @wrx7m be considering Extreme instead of someone like HP? Or maybe the price isn't that much if any less then Extreme with four SPF+ ports.
-
HP is just fine too. Get prices, see what the difference is. And what you have experience with and a good VAR relationship for matters as well.
-
So Adtran doesn't seem to have anything in the 10GE arena. I think that is another reason why I had eliminated them early on.
