Equipment upgrade WS-C4506-E

[eperezb]

Good afternoon network, we are currently in the process of updating the cisco WS-C4506-E, we currently have this equipment with redundancy with 5 network card modules, what is the best option to migrate to a more modern equipment? o would think of a 9500 or a 9600 but in your experience which is the best options?

[Scott Hodgdon]

eperezb,

To give an accurate suggestion, can you please provide some details on how you are using the 4506-E (Core, Distribution, Access) , which modules are in it and any major features that are running on the platform ?

Cheers,
Scott Hodgdon

Senior Technical Marketing Engineer

Enterprise Networking and Cloud Group

[eperezb]

It is a central core, which is like VSS to offer redundancy in the network.

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@eperezb wrote:

the process of updating the cisco WS-C4506-E, we currently have this equipment with redundancy with 5 network card modules

---

Unless I am reading this wrong, I'm going to presume the 4500 is acting as a core switch.  

NOTE: 

1. 4500 can either be core, distro or access switching.  What function are you trying to replace or upgrade? 
2. This will depend entirely on your budget.
3. In regards to your line card, what are they? 

There are so many ways to "upgrade" the 4500 to something recent with redundancy.  

Let me start from the cheapest option: 

1.  A stack of Catalyst 9300 is the cheapest.  There is a sub-model of the 9300 which offers 24- or 48-port SFP ports (SFP+ not natively supported).   Catalyst 9300 can be stacked up to 8 or 9 switches (supported feature).  

2.  Next one up would be the Catalyst 9400.  Take note the different variety of line cards available for this chassis-based system:  mGIG, PoE/PoE+/uPoE+, SFP/SFP+.  The 9400 supports VSS (combining two 9400 together to form a single logical system).  

3.  One up is the Catalyst 9500.  This one is an all-optical switch.  Copper ports and/or PoE/PoE+/uPoE+ not supported.  Depending on how much money you want to splurge, SFP/SFP+, 25-, 40- and 100 Gbps is supported.  Like the Catalyst 9400, support VSS too.  

4.  The big-daddy of them all, Catalust 9600 is the top of the tree (in terms of Catalyst switching). (I think the current supervisor card was originally called the "Sup10T" project for the 6800/6880.)  Like the Catalyst 9400 and 9500, the 9600 supports VSS.  The 9600 is mainly used as a core/super-core network with emphasis on 10-, 25-, 40- and 100 Gbps.  Of course, mGIG line card is available.  

NOTE: 

VSS, Stackwise, Stackwise Virtual -- They all meant the same thing.  VSS is easier to "pronounce".

[eperezb]

It is a central core, which is like VSS to offer redundancy in the network.

Modules Gi1/2/1- Gi1/5/1 and Gi2/2/1-Gi2/5/1

TRUE V 1 1 1

Switch Switch Status Preempt Priority Role Local Remote
Number Oper(Conf) Oper(Conf) SID SID
--------------------------------------------------------------------
LOCAL 2 UP FALSE(N ) 100(100) STANDBY 0 0
REMOTE 1 UP FALSE(N ) 110(110) ACTIVE 166 6867

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@eperezb wrote:

Modules Gi1/2/1- Gi1/5/1 and Gi2/2/1-Gi2/5/1

---

This output is not what we had in mind.
Post the complete output to the command "sh module".

[eperezb]

This output

Switch Number: 1 Role: Virtual Switch Active

Chassis Type : WS-C4506-E

Power consumed by backplane : 0 Watts

Mod Ports Card Type Model Serial No.
---+-----+--------------------------------------+------------------+-----------
1 8 Sup 8-E 10GE (SFP+), 1000BaseX (SFP) WS-X45-SUP8-E CAT2029L027
2 12 1000BaseX SFP WS-X4712-SFP-E CAT2012L0U6
3 48 10/100/1000BaseT EEE (RJ45) WS-X4748-RJ45-E CAT2019L7JL
4 48 10/100/1000BaseT EEE (RJ45) WS-X4748-RJ45-E CAT2019L7LE
5 48 10/100/1000BaseT EEE (RJ45) WS-X4748-RJ45-E CAT2022L1M1

M MAC addresses Hw Fw Sw Status
--+--------------------------------+---+------------+----------------+---------
1 1.3 15.1(1r)SG5 03.06.05.E Ok
2 1.0 Ok
3 1.1 Ok
4 1.1 Ok
5 1.1 Ok

Mod Redundancy role Operating mode Redundancy status
----+-------------------+-------------------+----------------------------------
1 Active Supervisor SSO Active

Switch Number: 2 Role: Virtual Switch Standby

Chassis Type : WS-C4506-E

Power consumed by backplane : 0 Watts

Mod Ports Card Type Model Serial No.
---+-----+--------------------------------------+------------------+-----------
1 8 Sup 8-E 10GE (SFP+), 1000BaseX (SFP) WS-X45-SUP8-E CAT2029L08B
2 12 1000BaseX SFP WS-X4712-SFP-E CAT2019L13W
3 48 10/100/1000BaseT EEE (RJ45) WS-X4748-RJ45-E CAT2022L1JN
4 48 10/100/1000BaseT EEE (RJ45) WS-X4748-RJ45-E CAT2018L5LE
5 48 10/100/1000BaseT EEE (RJ45) WS-X4748-RJ45-E CAT2019L7EJ

M MAC addresses Hw Fw Sw Status
--+--------------------------------+---+------------+----------------+---------
1 1.3 15.1(1r)SG5 03.06.05.E Ok
2 1.0 Ok
3 1.1 Ok
4 1.1 Ok
5 1.1 Ok

Mod Redundancy role Operating mode Redundancy status
----+-------------------+-------------------+----------------------------------
1 Standby Supervisor SSO Standby hot

[Scott Hodgdon]

eperezb,

If it is your intention to maintain copper connections on the new switch, then the 9500 is not an option.

Will you require any kind of power over ethernet on this switch ?

Cheers,
Scott Hodgdon

Senior Technical Marketing Engineer

Enterprise Networking and Cloud Group

[Leo Laohoo]

Too many line cards.  I agree with @Scott Hodgdon, Catalyst 9500 has been eliminated from the list. 

This leaves Catalyst 9400 and Catalyst 9600.

It is a waste of money to go Catalyst 9600 just to terminate 1 Gbps copper links because Catalyst 9600 is meant for 5 Gbps and higher.  

Tell us more what the future plan of the network is going to be like.

[eperezb]

The design of the network is going towards the very near future, we currently have a port-channel to connect the servers, we need faster connections with greater capacity.

roughly what is the most notable difference between the Cisco 9400 and the Cisco 9600 in addition to the price?

[Scott Hodgdon]

eperezb,

The primary technical differences between the 9600 and 9400 are:

1. No uplinks on Supervisor of 9600 so you must use module ports for uplink; 9400 offers 10/25/40G uplink options
2. Support for 40G and 100G module in 9600
3. 9600 is 1.2Tbps per slot; 9400 is 80Ggbs (10-slot), 120Gbps (7-slot), 240Gbps (4-slot)
4. 9600 offers 48-port mGig module with up to 10Gbps on all interfaces
5. 9600 offers 48-pot 1/10/25G fiber module; 9400 does not support 25G fiber on modules, only on the Sup1-XL-Y uplinks
6. 9600 as more scale for Routes, ACLs, NetFlow, Buffers and others
7. 9600 supports Quad-Sup StackWise Virtual
8. 9600 allows for customization of FIB and ACL resources
9. 9400 has Power over Ethernet

There are others, but those are the major differences of which I can think.

Cheers,
Scott Hodgdon

Senior Technical Marketing Engineer

Enterprise Networking and Cloud Group

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@eperezb wrote:

roughly what is the most notable difference between the Cisco 9400 and the Cisco 9600 in addition to the price?

---

9600 is aimed at "super" core network.  If you want to "future proof" your core, then this is it.  I am talking about lots of 25-& 40Gbps links and a few 100 Gbps links.  

If you want a "cheap" core network then 9400 where the downlinks are predominantly 1-, 10 Gbps with a sprinkle of 25 Gbps and some 40 Gbps links.  

IMPORTANT:  Make sure to talk to your Cisco AM/SE when deciding with either 9400 &/or 9600 because you just might make get a free DNA Appliance.