|
I'll be getting either a 2948 or 2980 later this week (whichever becomes available) as a temporary switch for my home LAN until I can afford the gig unit I'm eyeing. Is there anything I should know about either of these? They're both EOL/EOS from Cisco and have two GBIC slots, so aside from the different number of ports I can't tell if either of them are worth trying to get over the other. I usually don't bother with Cisco for switching unless I need something Cisco-specific like prestandard PoE, but these are cheap as dirt for a bunch of 10/100 ports.
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2008 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 14:08 |
|
|
What are you paying for those? I paid like $50 each for my stack of 2950's. Check the for sale forum too. From time to time there are goons selling plenty of cisco stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2008 20:44
|
|
|
The 2948 will be around $50, don't know yet on the 2980 but if it's over $100 I won't bother. It seems they both run CatOS, and I've been told that the IOS-based switches are preferable, but at the price if I even just use them as dumb switches they seem like a good deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2008 22:12
|
|
|
M@, if he's around, can (probably) do you better than $50 for a 2948. Keep in mind, though, that they're going to be loud.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2008 23:40
|
|
|
Ninja Rope posted:M@, if he's around, can (probably) do you better than $50 for a 2948. Keep in mind, though, that they're going to be loud. My network "core" is going to be in a closet off of my garage, so noise won't matter. If the 2980 doesn't end up fitting my price or ends up not available, I'll see if I can find M@ for some 2948 numbers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2008 01:21
|
|
|
I find a lot of this a bit new and confusing, I've skimmed over the thread so I hope I haven't missed an answer for this. I've had a 3620 on my hands for a year and a bit, but I never got around to really setting it up. It has a 1FE2W with a DSL WIC inside, and a 4E. Flash and RAM are maxed out. Not sure which IOS right now. My hope is to find a Cable WIC and set it up to do BOTH failover and balancing by traffic type. Bittorrent would go out over ADSL, and HTTP/other over Cable. But if either cable or DSL goes down, that it would switch all traffic. I don't believe the 3620 supports a cable WIC as I've checked the support lists for each, and the other isn't mentioned. This means I might have to hook up the cable to an ethernet port - which may affect the ability to configure it this way? I'm just not sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2008 06:34
|
|
|
I'm looking to do some cheap load balancing, hopefully for nothing more than the cost of a new WIC. I have a 2800 series which is terminating an MPLS link and feeding it into a local LAN. If I were to install an ADSL2+ WIC alongside this and configure an IPSEC tunnel over this ADSL link, would I be able to get proper load balancing going, or will it simply function in a failover capacity? I'm not 100% sure what's installed in this thing as far as WICs go, and it's on the other side of the Atlantic. Show modules isn't a valid command for some reason, so how could I go about finding out what's installed and if I have a spare WIC slot? Here's a sh version in case it matters; code:
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2008 02:09
|
|
|
Load balancing with different types/speeds of connections probably isn't a good idea. You could probably get another T1/E1 wic and do a ppp multilink with them though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2008 02:53
|
|
|
Smegmatron posted:I'm looking to do some cheap load balancing, hopefully for nothing more than the cost of a new WIC. I have a 2800 series which is terminating an MPLS link and feeding it into a local LAN. If I were to install an ADSL2+ WIC alongside this and configure an IPSEC tunnel over this ADSL link, would I be able to get proper load balancing going, or will it simply function in a failover capacity? On routers, you can issue the "show diag" command and it will show you any installed WICs/NMs/AIMs, etc. That looks like it has a VWIC-1MFT-E1 installed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2008 03:08
|
|
|
jarodm posted:On routers, you can issue the "show diag" command and it will show you any installed WICs/NMs/AIMs, etc. That looks like it has a VWIC-1MFT-E1 installed. Close: VWIC2-1MFT-G703 - 1-Port RJ-48 Multiflex Trunk - T1/E1 & G.703 Kreg posted:Load balancing with different types/speeds of connections probably isn't a good idea. You could probably get another T1/E1 wic and do a ppp multilink with them though. Not an option, unfortuantely. Why would you advise against doing this? I would think that as long as metrics and whatnot are set to appropriately report one link's quality/speed versus the other, it would work itself out. Smegmatron fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Jul 7, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2008 05:25
|
|
|
Smegmatron posted:Close: VWIC2-1MFT-G703 - 1-Port RJ-48 Multiflex Trunk - T1/E1 & G.703 Is the MPLS circuit from an upstream provider or is it something you've set up to a branch office or the like? If you want to do an IPSec tunnel that ought to be fine and you should be able to do some per-destination load balancing as long as the MPLS connection and the IPSec tunnel are going to the same place, and as long as you control that place, and not an upstream provider. If it is an upstream provider, then I wouldn't waste my time trying to load balance. Also I'm looking at buying some switches. Does anyone have any that they want to unload? Thinking about at least 3; 4 optimally.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2008 05:54
|
|
|
atticus posted:Is the MPLS circuit from an upstream provider or is it something you've set up to a branch office or the like? If you want to do an IPSec tunnel that ought to be fine and you should be able to do some per-destination load balancing as long as the MPLS connection and the IPSec tunnel are going to the same place, and as long as you control that place, and not an upstream provider. The MPLS link ends up on a network that I'm in control of at each end. Anyway, I've just realised this is all completely pointless since the traffic i'm trying to balance is incoming, not outgoing. The balancing needs to happen at the other end, and there isn't any Cisco gear there  Thanks anyway, guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2008 07:19
|
|
|
Search is broken so I hope this wasn't addressed on another page. I'm trying to help someone out with NBAR QoS. They want to prioritize a series of sites and drop traffic on others; while still rate limiting others. I'm checking out some cisco resources but they aren't too useful on the subject. Would this be roughly what I want to do: 1. Create a class-map to identify traffic 2. create a policy-map to tag the traffic somehow 3. user priority queueing on the given interface I want to do QoS on? Or am I limited to just defining bandwidth specifics. I'm probably asking this question in the most horrible fashion. Any sort of website that explains this for stupid people would be greatly appreciated. Google is returning a lot of rate limiting examples (not necessarily what I'm looking for) and drop examples and cisco refers me to a reference guide that presumes I actually know what I'm doing. edit: I think a better way to say it is I have two websites that are business related: foo.com which is important and bar.com which is slightly less important then poo poo like myspace.com which are absolutely not important. I want to make sure requests to foo.com are always serviced first and that rest of the internet goes to the back of the line. 1000101 fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Jul 7, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2008 22:53
|
|
|
This is a pretty good tutorial: http://ardenpackeer.com/qos-voip/tutorial-how-to-use-cisco-mqc-nbar-to-filter-websites-like-youtube/
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 03:59
|
|
|
Make sure you shape or police to a known line rate- things get very difficult with bursty broadband connections where the throughput isn't known with any predictability. And if you shape, shape to average, not peak. Peak, for reasons that I don't understand, replenishes both with the token rate, plus an accumulated burst rate. It's almost never what you want, but figuring that out takes a while. Also, don't priority queue unless you're aiming for low jitter and can guarantee the traffic rate will not exceed your priority commitment- it's a strictly policed bucket, so overages will be dropped, as opposed to queued.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 04:37
|
|
|
I have a Cisco851W router. I just use it for home networking. I've got port forwarding working for Bittorrent, AIM, etc. But it's not done very elegantly.code:Are all those lines really neccessary or is there a way to define ranges of UDP/TCP ports to forward for specific IPs?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 07:59
|
|
|
Longshot: Is there a way I can find out what kind of GBIC (make, model, ANYTHING) that is plugged into a slot? Show interface gives me 'GigaStack module(0.2) in GBIC slot.' but obviously this is not enough info. I have to replace a switch that is far away in another site and I have to put 4 GBICs in the new switch for a fiber hand-off as well as a trunk to a switch on another floor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 15:21
|
|
|
BoNNo530 posted:Longshot: That should be enough, gigastack is a special module with 2 connectors made for building ring-structures. Partno: WS-X3500-XL http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/si/casi/ca3550/prodlit/gbic_ds/gbic_ds3.gif ior fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Jul 8, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 15:27
|
|
|
quote:Is there a way I can find out what kind of GBIC (make, model, ANYTHING) that is plugged into a slot? Show interface gives me 'GigaStack module(0.2) in GBIC slot.' but obviously this is not enough info. 'show interface <INT> capabilities' will produce something like this: GigabitEthernet3/7 Model: WS-X6408-GBIC Type: 1000BaseLH Speed: 1000 Duplex: full
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 15:31
|
|
|
Frankenstein posted:'show interface <INT> capabilities' will produce something like this: Thanks guys for the quick replies.. I can't get that to work, unfortunately. This IOS is so old and I keep forgetting to flash it during off-hours. It is a 3548 switch that will be replaced with a 2960G switch. I have 4 open GBIC slots and one slot needs to handle the GigaStack and one to handle "SX" Here is the switch in question: code:
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 15:41
|
|
|
BoNNo530 posted:Thanks guys for the quick replies.. Unfortunately for you there is no gigastack for the 2960 (which has SFP ports, not GBIC). The correct SX partno for your 2960 would be GLC-SX-MM.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 15:46
|
|
|
The 3500 series used a GBIC slot whereas the newer Cisco switches use SFP ports (much smaller than GBIC slots). I have no experience with the 2960 series but all the images I can find look like it has SFP ports. This means you won't be able to use a GigaStack module (GBIC form-factor, only meant for building switch 'stacks') and you will need to buy new transceivers. SX means "Short Haul"; this is very important. SX uses different fiber optics (multi-mode) than LX ("Long Haul", single-mode fiber) so if you're trying to do a drop-in replacement, you will need to get SFP modules that match your existing fiber runs; looks like they're multi-mode.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 15:54
|
|
|
Thanks a TON, guys. This info is very helpful. I am sending it off to our sales rep and he will get with his Cisco guy to help us. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2008 16:07
|
|
|
Does anyone have experience with performing, for lack of a better term, a gender bender on a 6500 -> 7600? We have an OSM blade that is no longer supported under the 12.2SX train and we're trying to look at all our options.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2008 00:02
|
|
|
tortilla_chip posted:Does anyone have experience with performing, for lack of a better term, a gender bender on a 6500 -> 7600? We have an OSM blade that is no longer supported under the 12.2SX train and we're trying to look at all our options. Some of the earlier SR code will run on 6500 chassis I think, however the routing BU really wants people to be using the 7600 if they want their BUs features. Aren't OSMs on the way out in favor of SIP/SPA solutions nowadays anyway?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2008 00:37
|
|
|
Girdle Wax posted:Some of the earlier SR code will run on 6500 chassis I think, however the routing BU really wants people to be using the 7600 if they want their BUs features. I would definitely not count on using OSM's long term. They've been moving everything for routing BU to routers and out of switches. Heck, the LAN switching BU is trying to get people off of the C6K and to the N7K, which is Ethernet only. We've still got 7200's floating around with our N7K config to do a few things the N7K can't handle, but for interconnect long term I'd suggest 7200, 7300, 10k, or the new ASR 1000 (which is a pretty slick little router if you're doing a lot of OC-3 connectivity and only need routing features). We use 7200's because we're just on a WAN edge and they're cheap (sub $20k) and support Server Load Balancing (which we used to do on the C6K but lost with the N7K). Relevant to the original inquiry, though... tortilla_chip posted:Does anyone have experience with performing, for lack of a better term, a gender bender on a 6500 -> 7600? We have an OSM blade that is no longer supported under the 12.2SX train and we're trying to look at all our options. The 7600 has very limited support for OSM's, and Cisco instead wants you to plan on moving to SPA cards with SPA processors. See: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/routers/ps368/prod_eol_notice0900aecd8073fdf9.html (Edit: this is a relevant but wrong link but now I've lost the original in the maze that is cisco.com, sorry.) and http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/routers/ps368/products_relevant_interfaces_and_modules.html They're on a huge kick with breaking up switching, firewalling, and routing into different devices. I mean, few Ethernet modules are truly "supported" by the 7600, and support for line cards in the 6500 is dropping (and non-existent on the N7K), so the best course of action to take is to start separating your routers from your switches and firewalls. That's what Cisco is working towards, as far as I can tell, and not seeing many other good options for working 10GbE into our data center, we went down the 7200/ASA/N7K road. Also, don't believe what Cisco's site says about most 10/100/1000 Ethernet modules for the C6K working flawlessly on the 7600, a lot of them will work, but some of them flat out do not work, and getting them to clarify what does and does not work is sometimes as specific as firmware versions on specific hardware versions of cards. You've pretty much got to move to the "Ethernet Services" cards specific to the 7600 if you want it in writing to work. Those cards are obscenely expensive right now, but they do manage hardware offloaded MPLS, if you need it. This may have changed since a few months ago when I initially looked into this. windex fucked around with this message at 05:33 on Jul 10, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 02:16
|
|
|
Its my experience int he Service Provider lab that all the old 6500 line cards (6108-6948) work in the 7600s except for the SIP/SPAs, which are very finicky. Lots of them work, but not all. Of course the ES cards will work in both chassis (for now) but since the 6500 and the 7600 BUs split, that won't be the case for much longer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 03:32
|
|
|
windex posted:Also, don't believe what Cisco's site says about most 10/100/1000 Ethernet modules for the C6K working flawlessly on the 7600, a lot of them will work, but some of them flat out do not work, and getting them to clarify what does and does not work is sometimes as specific as firmware versions on specific hardware versions of cards. You've pretty much got to move to the "Ethernet Services" cards specific to the 7600 if you want it in writing to work. Those cards are obscenely expensive right now, but they do manage hardware offloaded MPLS, if you need it. This may have changed since a few months ago when I initially looked into this. All the 'current' 10/100/1000 modules (ie, 6700 CEF720 stuff) seems to work great in the 7600, you just don't get all the features you do on an ES card. And for medium scale TDM/SONET (~300 serial ifs/router, using CHOC3/CHOC12 interfaces since DS3 transmux is expensive in my SONET gear) the 7600 seems to be the place to be right now, since the ASR is still copper only for TDM (although OC3/12 SPAs are on the roadmap...), and GSRs are horribly, horribly expensive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 05:36
|
|
|
Girdle Wax posted:All the 'current' 10/100/1000 modules (ie, 6700 CEF720 stuff) seems to work great in the 7600, you just don't get all the features you do on an ES card. Yeah, you are right about the 'current' stuff. The problem we had with that plan boiled down to - who has 'current' (almost brand new) Ethernet modules in their 5+ year old 6500 chassis.  And, yeah, 7600's are great routers. They just aren't great switches (in my opinion), and my thought originally was: for someone who's coming off of a 6500-series, they probably need a switch. Thinking back, I'm probably wrong, since I forget a lot of people were using them for OSM's.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 05:44
|
|
|
7600's make fine switches. We cut over from a cluster of 6500's for core ATM aggregation (think 50k PVCs total) to a pair of 7600s with zero problems.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 09:05
|
|
|
Am I missing something? I was under the impression that the 7600 and the C6K were practically the same box... Anyway, I haven't heard any replies to my switch request.  Does anyone have any that they can move, or should I start trolling ebay?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 18:28
|
|
|
atticus posted:Am I missing something? I was under the impression that the 7600 and the C6K were practically the same box... What sort of switches, and did you ask M@ what he's got around? He's sort of the unofficial go-to used market guy around here I guess. 6500 and 7600 were the same until Cisco decided that they should be different- which is to say, someone finally realized that competing against yourself because you tried to woo the carrier market on a semantic difference, didn't make a lot of sense. At least, that's my take on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 18:52
|
|
|
jwh posted:What sort of switches, and did you ask M@ what he's got around? He's sort of the unofficial go-to used market guy around here I guess. I could shoot him a PM but thought I saw him post in this thread pretty regularly, so I figured he might jump on it earlier. Doesn't matter what kind, something low-end and cheap, 2950s or slightly better. Just need them for a CCIP/CCIE lab - I'll use Dynamips for everything else. Thanks for the clarification on the platforms. We're pretty C6K heavy but started putting 7609's on our edge in places. Maybe I just stuck on old knowledge but was under the impression (until now anyway ) that they were architecturally identical. Oh well. Times change I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 19:01
|
|
|
atticus posted:Maybe I just stuck on old knowledge but was under the impression (until now anyway Oh they were- the only reason the 7600 exists at all is because Cisco couldn't sell the 6500 in the carrier market, because it was a "switch" and not a "router". Solution? Make a new BU, invent a new product number, call it a router, and worry about the confusion later. Of course, that was then, and the platforms are diverging now- much to the dismay of everyone who bought one or the other.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 19:34
|
|
|
I need to uplink a stack of Dell powerconnect 3548s to a Cisco catalyst 3560. Would a cisco sfp interconnect cable work or am I going to need to go buy SFP transcievers?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 22:55
|
|
|
I'm currently using a Linksys WAG200G ADSL2+ router, but it's limited to 20 individual ports forwarded and 10 ranges forwarded. This isn't really enough and it can't load DD-WRT or Tomato. I have just signed up for a CCNA course and as part of the deal I got 2x Catalyst 2600 routers to practice on and then keep. What I'm wondering is whether once I've done the course, I could use them at home. An explanation: My ISP is Be and it's an ADSL2+ implementation. They also provide you with a 'BeBox', which in my case is a rebranded Thomson ADSL2+ router. The interface is absolute wank. However I have been told that it can be used purely as a modem or bridge, with another router actually managing the port forwarding, QoS, etc. Do you know if this Cisco router that I have would be suitable for that? Would I be able to map as many ports as I like? Would it run a DHCP server too? Excuse my ignorance but I haven't started the course yet and I only know the theory behind different protocols and bugger all about the practicalities of actual hardware! I know I'd lose the wireless connectivity but that's not a problem as I have an access point lying around. ...Or would the hassle involved with setting up the Cisco router for home use not be worth the £30 I'd save by not buying a WRT54G?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 23:15
|
|
|
Here's my story: I took CCNA classes in 2006 but unfortunately, I got loaded down with summer work and then I went back to school so I never really got to take (and pass, God willing) my CCNA. I understand that there have been some updates to the test and, since I have a relatively free summer schedule this time around, I want to get this monkey off my back. I still have my books I used when I took my classes. They're Cisco Press circa 2005. I imagine they might be good enough but I need to know A) What has changed with the test (added, subtracted, etc.) and B) what is another good book to get in addition? I've got a Boson simulator somewhere (it came with the Cisco Press books) so I'm covered there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2008 23:53
|
|
|
You need wireless (what the various channels are, differences in a,b,g,n implementaion) , and drop the ISDN stuff. Also there is more emphasis on security (easy stuff really). I'm sure there are other differences but those are the main ones that I can think of right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2008 00:02
|
|
|
Syano posted:I need to uplink a stack of Dell powerconnect 3548s to a Cisco catalyst 3560. Would a cisco sfp interconnect cable work or am I going to need to go buy SFP transcievers? I doubt the Dells support the Cisco SFP interconnect cable so I'd recommend you go with a pair of GLC-SX (SX SFP) and a duplex LC-LC multimode (62.5) jumper to go between them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2008 00:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 14:08 |
|
|
Sergeant Hobo posted:Here's my story: I took CCNA classes in 2006 but unfortunately, I got loaded down with summer work and then I went back to school so I never really got to take (and pass, God willing) my CCNA. I understand that there have been some updates to the test and, since I have a relatively free summer schedule this time around, I want to get this monkey off my back. You'll need to become familiar with SDM (lol) as well. Here's what they need: http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/le3/current_exams/640-802.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2008 10:37
|
|