«

Hello:

My company is looking at the 4507R which seems to be overkill for us
(but that is ok). Right now we have a mishmash of HP Pro Curve 4000Ms
and inexpensive Dell Power Connect switches. We are looking to go to a
core switch for our internal network. We are a small sized company with
about 80 users and several servers from public www, email, smtp, as
well as internal filemaker, mysql and internal www servers. We are
looking to go all Gig on the network so everything is speedy and we
plan on going VoIP in the near future. We're initially looking at 3 -
48 port Gig Blades plus redundant managers, and redundant power
(2x2800W) for the power.

We really like the Cisco VoIP solution that is offered. We have a small
call center (20 agents) and it would be a great fit.

The ppl from Avaya of course want us to buy an Extreme Core switch
model 8810 which has 3 power supplies 700W/1200W (which doesn't seem
adequate but they say it is.). Also they say that the 4507R's backplane
is limiting and based on old (I say 'proven') technology.

Keep in mind that the 8810 is nearly 33% more expensive than the Cisco
solution we're quoting. The Extreme people say that since the backplane
is 585M vs the 48M on the Cisco that it's 10 times better. I beg to
differ because we'd never even come close to utilizing it. Right now
we're getting by fine with the ProCurves (a 3.8M backplane)... so with
the new Cisco solution, we'd be almost 15 times faster right off, if
that's even a concern.

Thoughts? I need some ammo to stick with Cisco.

Thanks
Marc

Extreme Support is horrible

Hi Marc,

You may wish to investigate Extreme vs. Cisco Comparisons:

http://www.bradreese.com/cisco-extreme-8810.pdf

Found at Cisco vs. Competitor Lab Tests:

http://www.bradreese.com/cisco-vs-competitor.htm

Sincerely,

Brad Reese
BradReese.Com Cisco Repair Service Experts
http://www.BradReese.Com
1293 Hendersonville Road, Suite 17
Asheville, North Carolina USA 28803
USA & Canada: 877-549-2680
International: 828-277-7272

Hello, www.BradReese.Com!
You wrote on 26 Jan 2006 14:15:28 -0800:

wBC> You may wish to investigate Extreme vs. Cisco Comparisons:

wBC> http://www.bradreese.com/cisco-extreme-8810.pdf

wBC> Found at Cisco vs. Competitor Lab Tests:

wBC> http://www.bradreese.com/cisco-vs-competitor.htm

And Test Configuration and Methodology portion tells why I don't take such
comparisons seriously. 4500 series 48 ports GigE blade is using 8:1
oversubscription to backplane. With this knowledge I can tell without any tests
that trying to push 45 Gb worth of traffic through such blade is not going to
work.
Another question is how close to reality is such scenario. 45 Gb of sustained
traffic is a lot.

With best regards,
Andrey.

Agreed about the traffic. At our facility, we'd never touch the 45G of
sustained traffic. The switch is nice, but it's totally overkill
already.

Hello, stumpz!
You wrote on 27 Jan 2006 07:13:58 -0800:

s> Agreed about the traffic. At our facility, we'd never touch the
s> 45G of sustained traffic. The switch is nice, but it's totally
s> overkill already.

There is still some options. You can use 6 ports GigE blades for servers, for
example. Ports are not oversubscribed on it. Or go with the stack of 3750. Or
get 4503 with Sup II+TS - it has 12 wire speed copper GigE + 8 wire speed SFP
ports. Connect your servers there and desctop to regular 48 ports GigE blades.

With best regards,
Andrey.