Help with some Cisco Questions
-
That is not a bad idea, however the one you linked is only 1Gb SFP ports, I'd need 10Gb SFP+ ports.
-
@jrc said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
Well it'll be 10Gb from our Smoothwall Firewall/Content Filter, which will also have a 10Gb in from the ISP, however that will be managed fiber and capped at 2Gb.
I am not sure how adding another switch would help, as it would also only have 2 SFP+ ports, and then a single port on both switches would be used for the uplink, so there would be a no net gain in 10Gb ports. Or were you thinking a different way of doing that?
If I do end up with another switch, I'd like to keep it in the 2960x and 3560x families as these are the only models we have on our network and I want to keep the models as consistent as possible.
First of all, I'm restating the issue you're having: "I need more fast ports, but I don't want to buy the correct equipment for my need." Either you're going to introduce another type of switch, or you're not going to get what you need, really quite simple so far as that goes.
I think @JaredBusch meant the ES-16-xg: https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgeswitch-16-xg/
-
@travisdh1 said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
@jrc said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
Well it'll be 10Gb from our Smoothwall Firewall/Content Filter, which will also have a 10Gb in from the ISP, however that will be managed fiber and capped at 2Gb.
I am not sure how adding another switch would help, as it would also only have 2 SFP+ ports, and then a single port on both switches would be used for the uplink, so there would be a no net gain in 10Gb ports. Or were you thinking a different way of doing that?
If I do end up with another switch, I'd like to keep it in the 2960x and 3560x families as these are the only models we have on our network and I want to keep the models as consistent as possible.
First of all, I'm restating the issue you're having: "I need more fast ports, but I don't want to buy the correct equipment for my need." Either you're going to introduce another type of switch, or you're not going to get what you need, really quite simple so far as that goes.
I think @JaredBusch meant the ES-16-xg: https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgeswitch-16-xg/
Where did I say that I don't want to buy the the correct equipment? I merely said I'd like to maintain the consistency of models that I current have, that does not automatically mean that I am not prepared to buy what is needed.
The main reason I want to try to keep the consistency is because I am not very strong on the networking side, I know Cisco, and can get them working in our setup. Changing the core router to something else would mean changing our routing protocol from EIGRP to something non cisco (I think) and I am not too sure I am able to do that just yet. Not saying I am not willing to learn, just saying it would be WAY outside of my comfort zone right now.
-
@jrc said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
@travisdh1 said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
@jrc said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
Well it'll be 10Gb from our Smoothwall Firewall/Content Filter, which will also have a 10Gb in from the ISP, however that will be managed fiber and capped at 2Gb.
I am not sure how adding another switch would help, as it would also only have 2 SFP+ ports, and then a single port on both switches would be used for the uplink, so there would be a no net gain in 10Gb ports. Or were you thinking a different way of doing that?
If I do end up with another switch, I'd like to keep it in the 2960x and 3560x families as these are the only models we have on our network and I want to keep the models as consistent as possible.
First of all, I'm restating the issue you're having: "I need more fast ports, but I don't want to buy the correct equipment for my need." Either you're going to introduce another type of switch, or you're not going to get what you need, really quite simple so far as that goes.
I think @JaredBusch meant the ES-16-xg: https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgeswitch-16-xg/
Where did I say that I don't want to buy the the correct equipment? I merely said I'd like to maintain the consistency of models that I current have, that does not automatically mean that I am not prepared to buy what is needed.
"If I do end up with another switch, I'd like to keep it in the 2960x and 3560x families as these are the only models we have on our network and I want to keep the models as consistent as possible."
The main reason I want to try to keep the consistency is because I am not very strong on the networking side, I know Cisco, and can get them working in our setup. Changing the core router to something else would mean changing our routing protocol from EIGRP to something non cisco (I think) and I am not too sure I am able to do that just yet. Not saying I am not willing to learn, just saying it would be WAY outside of my comfort zone right now.
From a quick Google, it looks like EIGRP should work just fine with another router that can only do IGRP.
"EIGRP is an enhanced version of IGRP. The same distance vector technology found in IGRP is also used in EIGRP, and the underlying distance information remains unchanged. The convergence properties and the operating efficiency of this protocol have improved significantly. This allows for an improved architecture while retaining existing investment in IGRP."
-
@jrc said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
Well it'll be 10Gb from our Smoothwall Firewall/Content Filter, which will also have a 10Gb in from the ISP, however that will be managed fiber and capped at 2Gb.
Again, I'm super jelly over here!
I am not sure how adding another switch would help, as it would also only have 2 SFP+ ports, and then a single port on both switches would be used for the uplink, so there would be a no net gain in 10Gb ports.
I know this is going to sound like I'm being JB - but why would you look at another switch with only 2 SFP+ ports? I specifically said another switch with more SFP+ ports. I was going to post a link to a Ubiquiti many SFP+ unit, but figured you wanted to stay Cisco so I didn't bother to look it up.
If I do end up with another switch, I'd like to keep it in the 2960x and 3560x families as these are the only models we have on our network and I want to keep the models as consistent as possible.
I think instead of saying a specific type of switch, you might have been better served by saying you wanted to stick to the Cisco equipment. Specifying these two models lead to JB and Travis' comments. Additionally, I'm assuming that your research has shown that no 2960x or 3560x switches have 4 or more SFP+ switch options? If you haven't looked yet, that might be the best place to start - look at their entire lineup in these lines and see if something fits your needs.
We all get blasted for the way we ask questions around here, well except for @JaredBusch. Ultimately it's one of the things I like about ML, it forces me to critically think about my questions before asking.Note: the C3KX-NM-10G appears to be EOL, that makes me think your switches are pretty darned old too. Might be cheaper to replace all of your current gear with Ubiquiti gear compared to buying a single piece of equipment from Cisco to fit your needs (assuming Ubiquiti gear can/does fit your needs).
-
@jrc said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
3560X
This is End-Of-Life as of May of this year. You've got a few more years until they are end of support. It may be cheaper to look at replacing the entire lot then continuing to invest in old technology.
-
@dashrender said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
@jrc said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
Again, I'm super jelly over here!
Well let me make you more so, our ISP offers us internet for free, all we have to do is get our fiber to them, they will also give us as fast an internet as we want, our only limiting factor is the ridiculous cost that Comcast throws at us for anything over 2Gbs. But the good thing is if we ever need more than 2Gbs (very unlikely I think) it's a simple request to them to up it. E-Rate pays for almost all of it as well.
I know this is going to sound like I'm being JB - but why would you look at another switch with only 2 SFP+ ports? I specifically said another switch with more SFP+ ports. I was going to post a link to a Ubiquiti many SFP+ unit, but figured you wanted to stay Cisco so I didn't bother to look it up.
Fair point, not sure why my mind went to one with just 2. I'd love it if they just made a 3560X with 4 10Gb SFP ports, would be perfect...
Being based for asking the question in a stupid less than clear way, sure I am all for that. But putting words in my mouth? I am not married to keeping the models I have. And at this point I am just researching options, there are a few months before this has to be in place.
I do like the look of the Ubiquiti switch, and it may be an option to consider, not terribly expensive either. But could it handle the traffic from over 3000 devices from 5 different sites?
-
@jrc well it is just a switch, not a router. So it should have no problem with that. Also, I did mean to link the 16xg not the 12.
https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgeswitch-16-xg/
The EdgeSwitch offers the forwarding capacity to simultaneously process traffic on all ports at line rate without any packet loss. For its total, non‑blocking throughput, the EdgeSwitch supports up to 160 Gbps.
Check the full specs to be sure it does what you need.
https://www.ubnt.com/downloads/datasheets/edgemax/EdgeSwitch_ES-16-XG_DS.pdf
-
https://i.imgur.com/DetNGOe.png
These are probably the important bits. Find out what your current switches have for numbers on these specs, if they are equal or less, than this should work without an issue. If the Cisco gear is somehow higher, well, then you need to keep looking.
-
@jrc said in Help with some Cisco Questions:
But could it handle the traffic from over 3000 devices from 5 different sites?
Most likely. You'll have to see what your current switches are capable of.
