Replacement for 2960S stack (TOR)‏

[johnelliot6]

Hi,



We have a 2960S stack (2 switches) in a remote DC that is getting very close to hitting vlan limit (255) - Any recommendations on a replacement would be greatly appreciated.



Currently using 48 ports (Including 3 SFP ports)...So requirement would be similar port density to what we currently have (Copper 96, SFP 8), but with a lot more vlan's...Im not a huge fan of the 2960's due to small buffers....this may have improved in the latest 2960 range?



The switch is quite busy...peak traffic 400Mb+/sec....so we are pushing the limits of this platform no doubt.

Switch is currently only doing L2.


Certainly not opposed to moving from a 2 switch stack -> 2 individual switches.... 


Cheers. 

[Leo Laohoo]

Im not a huge fan of the 2960's due to small buffers....this may have improved in the latest 2960 range?

All Catalyst switches have small buffers.  So whether you get 2960X or 3850 or 3650, you'll get buffer overflows because the switches are not designed for DC ToR use.  

We have a 2960S stack (2 switches) in a remote DC that is getting very close to hitting vlan limit (255) - Any recommendations on a replacement would be greatly appreciated.

This is not the question about what switches can support X amount of VLANs.  It's a question about your network design.  If you have a network with >100 VLANs that's not good already.

[johnelliot6]

We are a service provider - we have multiple connections(AGG's) to carriers, and each tail is a new vlan that is presented to us via these AGG's? Some EC's have 50+ tails at this POP....why is having more than 100 vlans "not good"?  

[Leo Laohoo]

why is having more than 100 vlans "not good"?  

Do you prune your VLANs or do you enable ALL your VLANs to all your switches?  I mean, if your switch has, say, 48 VLANs, do you just configure and enable only 48 VLANS.  You don't enable all >200 VLANs.  

[johnelliot6]

We only configure the vlans that are active services on this switch stack - i.e. We have over 200 active services coming in via a number of carrier aggs(as vlans) on this switch stack, which are then trunked to a router for L3.

We obviously need to upgrade - Just after some recommendations....Are the "new" versions of the lower-end switches any better with buffer size, or is the 4500/4900 range the best option?  

[Leo Laohoo]

Joseph always recommends 4500-X as a cheaper alternative to Nexus solution.  

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Disclaimer

The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.

Liability Disclaimer

In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.

Posting

I also recommend the 4500 series.  4900 are also better "better" than a 2960/3560/3750 series.  Both might also be better, regarding buffering, than the newer 3650/3850 series too.

BTW, recently, I had to deal with a 3750X with a bunch of iSCSI-SAN hosts - had lots and lots of interface drops.  (Operative word is had - figured out buffer settings that nearly eliminated drops [with QoS enabled]).