Nexus 7K vs 9K in new DC

[osi_badran]

dears,

i need to check about placing in new DC with 9K instead of 7K with considering that customer requested to start with 9K (Nexus mode) without ACI at the moment with considering upgrade option to ACI in future !

thanks

[Philip D'Ath]

What is it that you need to check?

[osi_badran]

at the new DC, existing circuits are 2xISP connections, 2x WAN MPLS connections, 2x 10G links to Campus core while DC module was designed to have N7Ks with attached firewalls to UCS and physical servers

when is it feasible to have N9K with Nexus mode instead of N7Ks with considering upgrade to N9K ACI mode later ? is there any validated design and prerequisites we can verify  ?

considering that NSX could be a parallel solution or integrated one !?

[Philip D'Ath]

If the customer was to go with the Nexus 9k in classic mode it is highly unlikely they would switch it to ACI mode later on, because of the massive outage it would cause.

Also from what I can see, Cisco don't pitch the 9k as a core switch.  It seems to me that the 7k is a better fit.

I found this article interesting about the issue:

http://movingpackets.net/2013/11/25/concerns-cisco-aci-nexus-9k/

If the customer is really keen on the 9k, perhaps combine it with some ASR's to give you really strong layer 3 functionality?

[osi_badran]

I think you have a valid point about migration between Nexus mode and then to ACI

but why N9K is not considered as a core compared to N7K with massive throughput and cheaper prices ?

and when is ACI becomes a preferred solution over Nexus mode ?

[Philip D'Ath]

I don't know enough about this area to answer your questions.

Personally, I feel nervous about the Nexus product line.  For me the main benefit of Nexus is price per 10Gbe port.  If you want to deploy a "proper" cloud, like Amazon, with on-demand provisioning and scalability then Nexus is a clear winner.  It is also great how to you use the virtual appliances, and apply rules per application (ACI) rather than per IP address.

However most of our clients don't work this way (okay, none of my clients work that way with their private clouds).  They don't do scripted provisioning of entire eco-systems.  They statically create individual VMWare machines one at a time, and have physical firewalls.

On the whole, I think I would prefer a 6800 series.  I also like having physical firewalls, that are completely independent of the virtual world.  And I especially like having a physical routing platform.  I then at least know if the VMWare environment gets itself in a tangle that at least the security is independent and still in place, and I can get to everything.

I am probably just a dying breed.