[66801] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Any 1U - 2U Ethernet switches that can handle 4K VLANs?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (sthaug@nethelp.no)
Mon Jan 26 04:05:41 2004
To: alex@relcom.net
Cc: swmike@swm.pp.se, nanog@merit.edu
From: sthaug@nethelp.no
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 26 Jan 2004 00:51:01 -0800"
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:04:55 +0100
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> 3550 runs IOS. That's an answer. I never allow any non-IOS router in
> production environment (except high end devices, such as Juniper, when
> benefits are very high). And 3550 is not expansive (yes, it is not cheap).
If you believe that IOS solves all problems, we live on different
planets.
> PS. How much ethernet ports do you have in the office? Do you have 100 K
> ports? If not, why do you need 128K MAC's? (I know only one case, when I
> need so much - some kind of DSL service...
Some kind of DSL service is indeed the background for my question.
> In most cases, you have 500 - 5,000 ports in one building. If you have more,
> it is unlikely that you use 3550 switches. So, it is enough for the tasks
> (just as performance - it have _enough_ performance). Btw, I believed that
> catalist swithes have not any limitations for the MAC tables (because they
> use memory _on demand_); where did you get this limitations? /I may be wrong
> here/
If you believe Catalyst switches have no MAC address limitations, I
have a nice plot of land in Florida to sell you :-) Ethernet switches
today use CAM to hold the MAC address tables - this CAM has a finite
size.
> PPS. I do not know for sure, but 3550 should support traffic shaping, which
> makes bufferring. Technically, yes, CEF (with packet dropping) is not good
> to provide 2 Mbit by 100 Mbit link.
3550 only supports policing. Yes, I have worked extensive with 3550
and it doesn't have the features I need right now.
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
