Cisco Catalyst SFP support 9200

[Tyler Durden]

Hi All

I have a dilemma, I have some low speed locations like a VoIP solution for instance and also some locations with low amount of users. I have to switch stack and duel link for redundancy back to the distribution from the access but this will require runs over 100m so will need to be fiber. I have been asked to spec the Catalyst 9000 series, so please correct me if I’m wrong but I can’t find a module for the 9200 series that supports 1Gb SFP (like Catalyst 29xx that are going EOL)?

Does this mean I have to use the Catalyst  9300 series if we intend to use fiber? If we do I can only see the 8x 10GB SFP+ modules and fitting them in all the locations along with having to use the higher spec 9300 will be considerably overkill and expensive? This seems backwards as the Catalyst family has always supported SFP with inbuilt options for 2 or 4 links?

Any help would be much appreciated 

[Seb Rupik · Accepted solution]

Hi there,

Any of the 9200 "-4G" models have four fixed SFP ports supporting 1G fibre.

The other non -4G or -4X models support network modules like the C9200-NM-4G ..

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/switches/catalyst-9200-series-switches/nb-06-cat9200-ser-data-sheet-cte-en.html

I don't remember there being 29xx which supported more than 4 SFP's. If you wanted greater density you always had to go for the 3750/ 3850 catalyst switches.

cheers,

Seb.

[jefmeek]

Actually both the "-4X" and "-4G" will support 1G SFP, with the "-4X" options also supporting 10G.

If you need a more than 4 uplinks ports have a look at the Catalyst 9300, which supports 8x 10G supporting SFP and SFP+ as well as 4x1G, 4xmGig, 2x25G and 2x40G

[dmacholz]

Has anyone ever ran into an issue having a 10G module installed, however the switch thinks its a 4G module instead?  I tried a soft reload of the 2nd switch in my stack and still showing up as G2/1/1 - G2/1/4 when it should be Te2/1/1 - Te2/1/4.  This is a 9200-48P model i believe.. Definitely not the L model.

Thanks,
Dave