Cisco C1300 series - are the stacking limits ports number based?

[Nils_TheOlderOne]

Hi,

I am interested in the Cisco C1300 series - specifically the C1300-48FP-4X. The data sheet says:

"Up to 8 switches in a stack. Up to 200 ports managed as a single system with hardware failover."

Does this mean a limit of eight units or 200 ports - whichever comes first? Meaning: that I can stack only four units of the C1300-48FP-4X as this already will exceed the limit of 200 ports?

Thanks for any clarifications and best regards,

Nils

[Joseph W. Doherty]

An interesting question as I see the 200 port stack limitation in the C1300's datasheet.

I just tried Cisco's on-line chat, and its Virtual Concierge, which was totally unhelpful (other than providing an option to leave feedback).

If this limitation is correct, it's unusual, as generally stack limits are usually based on max members and what units can be in the same stack (for the C1300s, there appears to be two different families of specific models that can be in the same stack).

If the 200 ports per stack is correct, I suspect it's more likely a marketing rather than a technical limitation.  I.e. if you want more than 200 ports, other (more costly) Catalyst switches can provide that.

BTW, the C1300-48FP-4X actually has 52 ports, don't forget the "4X", so if limited to 200 ports, you might only be able to stack 3.

Hopefully, someone knows for sure will post a reply.

Otherwise, you might try contacting Cisco sales.

[Nils_TheOlderOne]

Yeah, you are right about the 52 ports. So it probably will be only a stack of three then if the 200-ports-limit exists. I really hope that this is more marketing rather than technical.

I've contacted Cisco Sales. If they give me a definitve answer, I'll let you know...

[Joseph W. Doherty]

"I really hope that this is more marketing rather than technical."

To be clear, the marketing limitation I have in mind is an artificial imposed limit to avoid competing against other Cisco products, not a marketing documentation mistake.

[Nils_TheOlderOne]

"To be clear, the marketing limitation I have in mind is an artificial imposed limit to avoid competing against other Cisco products, not a marketing documentation mistake."

True, but neither the admin manual nor the video tutorial mentions anything about a stacking limit of 200 ports. So, this is very confusing to say so at least.

We'll see what the official Cisco contact will tell me.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Hopefully it will just be a documentation mistake.

Somewhat embarrassing to Cisco sales if this is a "difficult" question to answer.

[Nils_TheOlderOne]

I have not forgotten about this thread. I'm still waiting for an official answer...

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Well now - that's surprising.

So, just a few minutes ago, I called Cisco's 800 number, trying to see if I can get an answer (being a Cisco VIP and all).

Initially, I got directed but their automation system to technical support, identified myself (my name and Cisco Forums VIP), and reason for my call, but as I didn't have a product serial number, they connected me to sales.

After a few minutes, sales came on the phone.  Again, identified myself (as before), and the reason for my call (to verify a datasheet fact for the C1300).  I was then immediately disconnected!  That too was surprising.

I'm going to mention this, on the VIP forums section.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

So far, I have one other VIP reply to my VIP posting.  It was a good suggestion, but, unfortunately, not applicable to me.  However, it's only been a day, and likely those forums are not commonly read by most VIPs, although they might be read by Cisco managing these forums.  So, possibility, something good will come from it, yet.

If you haven't still heard back from Cisco, unfortunately, odds are they won't respond.  Likely, this may be due to sales might work on a commission, so unless you preface your question with something like I'm looking to purchase 5,000 C1300s, rather than 5, they don't see the potential sale as a personal benefit.  (Such might also account for just hanging up on me - IMO rather a poor way to treat customers [or "VIPs", certainly didn't seem VIP treatment].)

Possibly other options would be to contact an authorized Cisco reseller who sells to the SMB market.  Or, whoever you buy from has either a very generous return policy, like you can return for any reason within, say, 30 days, or specifically if you're truly limited to 200 ports in a stack.  (If you activate newly obtained C1300 devices, and have their serial numbers, you may then be able to open a TAC case.  Doing the forgoing is rather time wasteful for all involved.)

Lastly, you shop for similar equipment from other hardware vendors.  In my experience, other vendors are often very interested in taking the place of Cisco devices.  Such equipment usually costs less too.  Also in my experience, other vendor equipment is often more "buggy" than Cisco's and also less likely to correct their bugs.

If I do get information, from Cisco, on this specification, I'll post it here.

As an aside, a 200 port limitation would seem unusual if a technical limitation.  For a technical limitation, I would expect a power of 2 value like 256.

[Rich R]

Getting the Cisco partner/reseller to raise a sales query is probably the best option.  As I said on my VIP reply the product page incorrectly says they run IOS when they run a Linux based OS.  The limit wouldn't surprise me since they seem to be classed as "small business" products.  I found a sales presentation which makes no mention of the port limit.  I've asked a question on the feedback section there but not holding my breath because other questions from March haven't been answered yet! Now emailed doc owner to ask if anybody will be answering questions.

Update 22-04-2025: I've now emailed the SMEs responsible for the product to ask if any of them intend to answer the product questions at the suggestion of the document owner (apparently they're under no obligation to do so!).

[Nils_TheOlderOne]

Thanks a ton, guys, for looking into it. Especially for using your VIP statuses for this. I really appreciate that very much.

And yeah, it is very strange that Cisco seems to be somewhat 'reserved' regarding this switch series. Maybe it's too good for its price?

I still haven't heard from my sales contact. Granted, it's still the Easter vacations here...

[Joseph W. Doherty]

"Especially for using your VIP statuses for this."

Well, so far, at least my VIP status, and its, to date, demonstrated value to Cisco, $5 might allow me to buy a cup of coffee in a Cisco cafeteria.  I too haven't heard back on this issue from Cisco.

"Maybe it's too good for its price?"

More likely a too low profit margin.

In the VIP section, another VIP didn't recommend the series because he felt there was a similar lack of interest, by Cisco, in providing good support, even after you've acquired one.

In grand marketing schemes, often businesses will sell products at a low profit, or occasionally even a loss, to get you as a customer with the hope later on, you'll continue to purchase more of their products, ideally the more profitable ones.  However, initial disappointing interactions, can lead to you becoming a confirmed Brand X customer for the rest of your life.  So, unclear what Cisco's objectives are for selling low margin equipment with poor support.  Sometimes it's just a breakdown between the C-Suite level and those trying to accomplish goals such as meeting certain financial targets.  (It's not uncommon in the larger Enterprises.)

My expectation, at this point, we're likely at a dead end regarding a Cisco response.

In an earlier reply, I suggested if you could purchase with a suitable option to return, you might obtain the equipment and try to find out first hand.

One issue with the return approach, say it appears there's no 200 port limitation.  All appears good for a year and then you start having problems.  It turns out problem is because you exceeded 200 ports.  You say, but the IOS didn't preclude it.  Cisco says, oops you're correct, but our datasheet listed the limitation.  Cisco documents it as a known bug and the eventual fix is a later IOS enforces the limit.

Laugh, years ago, Cisco released a new feature, Turbo (compiled) ACLs for their 7200 routers.  I accidentally discovered the feature also was available in the lower ISRs, and seemed to work just fine, and reported this to Cisco.  Well, two IOS releases later, that feature no longer was available on the ISRs.

[Rich R]

Ha ha I hadn't heard that ACL story before @Joseph W. Doherty but sounds typical <smile>
I do remember having a number of bugs with those compiled ACLs though!
I'm still hoping I might get a reply to my email to the product SMEs ...

[Nils_TheOlderOne · Accepted solution]

So, I got an answer from one of the official distributors. They only offer the C1300 series as refurbished. And still no answer regarding the ominous 200-ports-limit.

I will give up my interest in this series. Something is way off.

Thanks again, guys, for all your contributions in this thread. Take care...

[Rich R]

I've had zero response from the 4 product subject matter experts I emailed so I guess that shows how much they care ...