New Equipment Questions

[Patrick McHenry]

Hi,

Been tasked with coming up with a lan design to replace some old Nortel equipment. It's a medium branch office with around 100 - 125 users spread accross a couple of buildings. I'm thinking of using a collapsed core design with uplinks to 5 access switch closets to different locations. We would like to have 2, 10 gig connections to each closet - one coming from each core.

For the core I was thinking of using 2, 16 port 4500-X switches and 3750 -X switches in the access closets connecting to users. I haven't seen any design guides using the 4500-X switches for aggregation so, I wondering if this is appropriate?

I was also thinking I could use 4928 switches for the core but I would be limited to 1 gig for the uplinks to the access layer switches.  

Any thoughts?

Or limitations?

Thanks, Pat.

[ALIAOF_]

That is not really a huge building depending on your growth to be honest with you 4948E's should be fine.  Any specific reason you need 10Gig uplins from each switch to the closet?  We are talking a huge cost difference here. 

Can you see your bandwidth usage now on your uplinks?  We have close to 400 users and all uplinks are two 1gig links (Port Channeled).

The only place I'm using a ten gig port channel is connecting two 4948E's to each other.  But any ways if you really want to go all ten gig then check out Nexus line

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps11541/prod_models_comparison.html

[Patrick McHenry]

I agree but, my boss wants to start with 10 gig and if it is too much $ we will drop to gig uplinks bundled. The only problem with that is we would have to run some more fiber links to the closets as I think we only have enough for 2 to each - which might be good enough but ya gotta think about the future.

So, do you think the 4500-X wouldn't be the right switch for the job?

Do you know approximate price difference between the 4500-X and Nexus switches?

Thanks, Pat.

[Reza Sharifi]

I think, 10Gig uplinks are appropriate these days, as 40Gig and 100Gig interfaces are coming to the market.  Going with 1Gig uplinks for a new design is not really looking forward and not thinking about the feature.

For distro/core, I would go with the 6500 series as they provide more capabilities and features.  You can use a couple of 6500 with Sup-2T in VSS mode.  So, connecting 2 10Gigs from your 3750X switches using a Portchannel will eliminate spanning tree, as the 6500 VSS appear to the 3750s as one logical switch.  You can also use a pair a 5Ks for your core/distro connecting them together using vpc.  The Nexus line is pretty nice and Nexus-OS is much better and stable than the Native IOS.  Cisco also just came up with a new Nexus 7004 chassis, which will give you 4 slots with 2 of them being used for sups and the other 2 for line cards. For the Nexus 7004, you can use F2 or M2 cards depending on your need and design.

HTH

[Patrick McHenry]

Thanks Reza - I think a couple of 6500s would be a little over-kill for the site and I believe you can take advantage of VSS with the 4500-Xs. I think the Nexus 7004 might be a little too much switch as well but, is there a Nexus model that is closer in performance to the 4500-X? And if so, what would be the biggest difference?

Thanks, Pat.

[Reza Sharifi]

Pat,

If the chassis based device like 6500 and 7k is too big and overkill, you can use a couple of 5Ks.  5548 is 1RU device and you get 32 1 or 10Gig fixed ports and an additional module you cad add to it that can raise the number of 1 or 10Gig ports to 48.  If you need it to do routing, you would need to buy the layer-3 daughter card for it.  They are pretty fast and so is the layer-3 card.  There is also the 5596 which is only 2RU.  Have a look at the datasheet:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps9441/ps9670/data_sheet_c78-618603.html

HTH

[Patrick McHenry]

Reza,

I never worked with a Nexus switch and I'm sure it's a great product, and correct me if I am wrong but, it doesn't seem that the 5000 series is a aggregation/core type switch. It seems to be be designed more for a data center with a need for performance. I'm looking for an appropriate aggregation/core 10 ig uplink solution to a Medium branch office.

Can you explain the differences between the 4500-X and Nexus 5000 series as far as the role the two products were designed for and if there is a major difference in price?

Thanks, Pat.

[ALIAOF_]

Cisco 4500-X are pretty sweet, they support VSS too as compared to the Nexus.  You can get all 10Gig ports looks like 32 is maximum and with an additional module you can get upto 40. 

About using 1Gig links and not thinking about the future would not be a correct statement.  It all depends on your existing and future needs.  If you think you would need 10Gig links to your Access layer switches in the next year to 3 years sure it might be worth it to spend that money.  But why spend so much money on 10Gig links if it is not going to be utilized.  Sure I can get the most expensive switch that can do all kinds of stuff in my network and ask my company to spend money.  4500-x's are around 27K and above and 4948E's are around 12K. 

I looked at our bandwidth usage accross all the links and it is no way near a Gig so I ended up doing Gig links port channeled that is 2Gig more than enough for my need and we won't need 10Gig I know for sure for next 5 years so why waste so much money into it right now.  5 years from now if there is a need I would much rather upgrade to the latest 10Gig equipment, hope that makes sense.

But bottom line is qulifying the need is the key here and if your boss certainly wants it and wants to spend money sure I personally would love to get my hands on the latest and the greatest . 

[Patrick McHenry]

I tend to agree with you.

And there is no need for 10gig at the site but, if they want it I can have fun putting it in.

You have 2, 4928s correct?

Can you use VSS with them our do you use HSRP/VRRP?

Do you have 2gigs from each 4928 going to each closet and one of the core 4928s is blocking it's trunk via STP?

Could you give me a summary of the design?

Thanks, Pat.

[Reza Sharifi]

Pat,

VSS is currently supported on the 6500 only.  It is coming to 4500 soon. So, 4900 series switches don't support VSS.

HTH

[Patrick McHenry]

I heard that it will be supported by the end of the year. Correct?

Thanks

[Reza Sharifi]

From what I heard in Networkes 2012, it is going to be the end of this year or 2013 sometimes. Even when it is out you don't want be the first one to deploy it. Having IOS bugs in new features is very common.

HTH

[ALIAOF_]

About VSS on the 4500-X best thing to do would be to get your Cisco reseller involved and ask them that you want to talk to Cisco's product specialist.  Then ask them about the anticipated date for the VSS support.  That is what we have always done.

You are correct 4948's do not support VSS, they support HSRP/VRRP/GLBP.  I am using GLBP.  They are sitting in the data center here is how I have them connected:

- 4948's both connected via two 10gig ports (port channeled)

- 2 x 1gig uplinks to other 2960 and 3560 switches (Port Channeled)

- There are two switches in each rack so I have them two connected via single trunk so that makes their STP cost 4, then I have them connected to the 4948's via 2 gig port channels STP Cost 3.  Currently I do not have each switch going to both 4948's.

- I setup my primary 4948E as the spanning tree root and second one as secondary root

- Just to avoid any issues I took an additional step and manually increased STP priority on the access switches.

- Also setup root guard on the Primary 4948E switch

- Here is the breif diagram of my setup, hope this helps.  And yeah if you can get your hands on 4500 X's and your boss is willing to pay I'd say sure why not

[Patrick McHenry]

Thanks for the diagram.

The 4948 has 48 copper ports and only 4, 1/10gig uplinks. Are your uplinks to the access layer switches using copper?

Also, what do the green lines represent?

Thanks, Pat.

[ALIAOF_]

That is correct, I'm just using the copper uplinks to the access layer switches. 

Sorry I meant to remove the green lines disregard those, those are just ISP connections I was figuring out.