Catalyst 3850+ a good Switch to keep or Upgrade?

pdenableetoavit19698 · ‎08-25-2023

Hi there,

I use 2 Catalyst 3850+ 48ports, stacked.

Trying to get an idea if this is still a current really good Switch to keep for the next 2/3 years or better to consider an upgrade?

Mainly used for multiple systems in the company, from automation PLC to internet wifi/AP NAS systems etc.

Probably 10 ports free on each.

Are there other switches oterwise you would recommend to replace this with ?

Is there an option where you can double the switches and get pair that is the main set and the other pair the redundant/takeover one in case any of the other two fails? worth it? how do you double all the connection to the two pairs? Or does it make the system too complicate to manage?

Any suggestions welcome!

Thank you!

Joseph W. Doherty · ‎08-25-2023

Unless you have need for features not available on the 3850, or those switches go end-of-support during the next 2-3 years, there's not much reason to upgrade.

Flavio Miranda · ‎08-25-2023

Hi @pdenableetoavit19698

3850 is an excellent device but unfortunatelly will be retired soon. If you/your company can afford device upgrade now, it is a good idea start planning for the new 9300.

"Is there an option where you can double the switches and get pair that is the main set and the other pair the redundant/takeover one in case any of the other two fails? worth it? how do you double all the connection to the two pairs? Or does it make the system too complicate to manage?"

There is not clustering for this switch. What you can do is stack them. If they are core switches for you, you can consider to use HSRP/VRRP for access switches.

If they are access switch, we usually dont provide physical redundancy as most end device have only one network adapter.

An example of redundany is below. You can see the access and the Core. You can put the Core in stack or you can use them in standalone and interconnect using layer3 with dynamic protocol or layer2 with port-channel.

If one core fail, access switch have a second option.

Joseph W. Doherty · ‎08-25-2023

@Flavio Miranda notes the 3850s are being retired soon. Much depends on exactly what's meant by "soon" and "retired".

Looking at what Cisco has published, concerning the 3850 series, we find this bulletin, has end-of-sale as 10/30/20, end of routine software support 10/30/21, end of security software support 10/31/25 and end of all support also 10/31/25.

BTW, the latest actual software release date, for 16.12.9 was 3/23/23.

From the above, you still have two years before the 3850 series becomes completely unsupported. Security (IOS) and hardware issues should be covered until that date.

So, possibly there's no real urgency to replace your 3850s, immediately, unless there are some new features, in current switches, you need now. Performance wise, the 3850 series, within a single switch, is wire-speed. The 9K switches probably support more stack cable bandwidth (for a stack of two 3850s, their 480 Gbps stack bandwidth is probably a non-issue) and may support higher bandwidth ports (e.g. 25, 40 and/or 100 Gbps).

So, again, if your 3850s are meeting all your needs, at the very least, you can plan out what you may want to migrate to in the next couple of years, and how to do such a migration.

Further, two years from now, no telling what gee-wiz switches Cisco will have then. ; )

Leo Laohoo · ‎08-25-2023

@pdenableetoavit19698 wrote:
Mainly used for multiple systems in the company, from automation PLC to internet wifi/AP NAS systems etc.

Dump the 3850. Downgrade to a stack of used 3750X -- Stable hardware platform, stable IOS codes.

Alternatively, Catalyst 1000 is still way better. The last Cisco Catalyst to run on classic IOS -- Nothing currently offered can/will beat that.

Joseph W. Doherty · ‎08-26-2023

Ouch, @Flavio Miranda suggests it's a good idea to start planning to migrate to the 9300 ASAP (if you can afford it - and, BTW, I'm not implying that's a bad idea).

I, though, suggested, (if no issues or missing needs with your 3850s), no need to rush into an upgrade. I.e. you can probably get by for 1 to 2 years.

@Leo Laohoo comes along and suggests if you want real stability, downgrade to the 3750X!!!

So, whose recommendation is "best"?

The answer is any of them or even none of them. Each of us is focused on a particular aspect of usage.

For example, Leo appears to be focused on no issues operations over a year or more. (Laugh, I too remember the days when we would compare how many years, even decades, that an earlier Catalyst switch was in production without a reload.)

I'm a penny pincher. I don't believe in replacing something just because it's old, if it truly still serves its intended purpose, without other issues.

@Flavio Miranda I suspect (apologize if what I suspect is incorrect), is looking toward maintenance issues, so recommends to start planning to migrate to newer switch, now, if you can afford to do so. Basically a more proactive approach than my reactive approach.

All our suggestions have pros and cons.

Personally, I don't believe any of our suggestions/recommendations might be categorized as either right or wrong, but might one be categorized as best? Possibly, but "best" would be your "best".

Consider the pros and cons, try to rank their importance, to you, and proceed accordingly.

Leo Laohoo · ‎08-26-2023

IOS-XE revolves around multi-CPU platforms.

For a switch, multi-CPU platforms are good if the operators want to go down the "automation" process. But here are the catch:

A lot of operators do not have the capacity and know-how to implement automation. There are still very large number of operators who are still on a "static VLAN". Only a few worldwide operators have crossed over to Dot1X and even fewer have gone into automation.
Deployment complexity is one limiting factor why operators are not embracing Dot1X or automation. The most important aspect is cost. Twice a year, Cisco quietly increases prices and this makes it harder for operators to, not just upgrade their old gears to new ones, but also implement something with their ever dwindling budget. Like some private smartphone owners, the cost of new smartphones are forcing private owners to longer "refresh" cycle. When the first smartphones were introduced, it was common to see a refresh cycle of two years. Nowadays, a refresh cycle of four to five years is getting more and more common. Longer refresh cycles because the cost of updating out-of-date switches or routers are becoming more prevalent in this forum
Finally, every operator is faced with a hidden (or silent) running cost: The cost of maintaining a stable network. Any Cisco-branded platform that is on IOS-XE OS will need to regularly troubleshoot their appliances. And if there is an absence in know-how to troubleshoot, reboot as a workaround. Firmware will need to be updated religiously or else face the consequences.

If an operator only wants to push packets around, is buying a supercharged, multi-CPU switch a logical answer?

If I was "burning money for the sake of burning money", yes. Heck yes.

Realistically, no.

Cisco brand was synonymous to the adjectives "reliable" &/or "stable". People leave their routers, switches and ASA on for years without major crashes. Finding critical or catastrophic bugs were not a trivial exercise. Getting the bugs fixed does not need to wait until several generations later.

If I wanted to push packets around, my network is "static" and I have a limited amount of funds, there is no substitute to a very matured operating system like classic IOS. For that, I'll take Catalyst 1000 or refurbished Catalyst 3750X any time. Any day.