|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: layer 3 switch debate
Since you are from Cisco...so it is your opinion that a Catalyst 6509 (i.e. Layer 3 switch) is equivalent to a 7206 or GSR? Of course, this is in regard to 'core' routing device in the middle of a national IP network. This network in question just happens to utilize a lot of GE LH interconnections. --- "Stephen Sprunk" <[email protected]> wrote: > >Thus spake "ip dude" <[email protected]> >> IP Community: >> >> When designing an all IP network requiring mostly Ethernet interfaces, the >logical conclusion is to specify layer 3 switches (instead of routers). The cost >per port and functionality requirements make a layer 3 switch the perfect >choice. However, the rule of thumb in the IP community is that routers are >superior to layer 3 switches and should be utilized instead, especially when >considering core type functionality. >> >> Does this rule of thumb still apply considering the modern layer 3 switches >available? If not, why? What makes a layer 3 switch sub-standard to a pure >router? Any quantitative analysis you could provide would be greatly >appreciated. > > >"switch" is a marketing term meaning fast, nothing more. Any device that >operates at Layer 3 is a router by definition. Therefore, "Layer 3 switch" >means "fast router". > >Now think about your question again. > >S _____________________________________________________________ Get your own free Ranch eMail and Classified Ads at http://cattletoday.com _____________________________________________________________ Select your own custom email address for FREE! Get [email protected] w/No Ads, 6MB, POP & more! http://www.everyone.net/selectmail?campaign=tag
|