08-23-2012 07:06 AM - edited 03-07-2019 08:30 AM
Hello,
I am preparing to purchase a Chassis and Line Cards for a site Network upgrade. Since this site happens to be our datacenter with our servers and also have about 200 client connections coming in, I was planing on purchasing two Chassis's and then installing 10GB and 1GB line cards (with POE+ on the 1Gb) so I could collapse all those connections into the two chassis.
I was talking to a vendor and he said that its not recommended that client connections be in the same chassis as your Core and that those connections should be on seperate switches that are uplinked to the core.
That seems like a waste for me as all devives in the chassis can be covered under one smartnet which saves quite a bit of money.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Does anyone out there have thier client line cards in the same chassis as the core.
Thanks,
Kevin
Solved! Go to Solution.
08-23-2012 10:39 AM
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
You vendor is making a good recommendation. Reason for the recommendation is to avoid having edge device instability upset the core of the network.
However, although the recommendation is good, as you've noted, it adds cost. So the real question is, risk vs. cost. Unfortunately, calculating risk can be extremely difficult, especially the likelihood of something happening. Then you need to also calculate cost of a failure. Compare to cost to avoid, and place your bet.
08-23-2012 10:39 AM
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
You vendor is making a good recommendation. Reason for the recommendation is to avoid having edge device instability upset the core of the network.
However, although the recommendation is good, as you've noted, it adds cost. So the real question is, risk vs. cost. Unfortunately, calculating risk can be extremely difficult, especially the likelihood of something happening. Then you need to also calculate cost of a failure. Compare to cost to avoid, and place your bet.
08-23-2012 11:42 AM
Please explain how can you be sure that the problem the edge device is having wouldnt reach the core if its not connected via a line card on the same chassis. The switch that connects to the device is going to be uplinked to the core anyway so what difference does that make?
08-23-2012 03:51 PM
Please explain how can you be sure that the problem the edge device is having wouldnt reach the core if its not connected via a line card on the same chassis. The switch that connects to the device is going to be uplinked to the core anyway so what difference does that make?
If your core goes down, so does everyone.
If you separate your core and access switch, then your access switch goes down, SOME of your clients can work.
Besides, in regards to maintenance some selected Cisco Catalyst switches have Limited LIFETIME warranty.
08-23-2012 05:18 PM
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
Kevin McDonald wrote:
Please explain how can you be sure that the problem the edge device is having wouldnt reach the core if its not connected via a line card on the same chassis. The switch that connects to the device is going to be uplinked to the core anyway so what difference does that make?
You're correct, having another device between the edge device and the core device doesn't 100% guarantee some problem can't still be "forwarded" into the core, just makes it a little less likely especially if the device(s) attaching to the core are L3.
For example, consider a L2 loop. Such might overrun the capacity of the device the loop is formed on. So, better it be an edge device rather than your core device.
Again, this is logic for the separation, but I'm not suggesting you always must separate devices. Much risk can be mitigated, as for example with L2 loops that's a reason to run a STP even when you don't have intentional L2 link redundancy.
08-27-2012 08:54 AM
Couldnt I just use L3 line cards in the Chassis and get the same effect as having a seperate switch?
Thanks for the replies!
Kevin
08-27-2012 05:43 PM
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
Kevin McDonald wrote:
Couldnt I just use L3 line cards in the Chassis and get the same effect as having a seperate switch?
Thanks for the replies!
Kevin
That would likely depend on the chassis and line card - might be true with a platform that performs distributing processing.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide