Re: 2960 (layer 2) vs 3560 (layer 3) ...considerations?
- From: "Scooby" <mmscooby1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:10:20 GMT
"Ned" <nedhart@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1158326559.784171.103720@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
We have serveral 3560's at the access layer, 3750's at the
distribution, and a 4507 at the core. We need more access layer
switches but the 3560G's are expensive. I noticed that the 2960 is a
good deal cheaper but it works at layer 2. Some of our future uses
will include VOIP, multicasting, vlans, and port security. I think
these can all be handled by a 2960 layer 2 switch. Any reasons why I
would choose the 3560 over the 2960?
Thank You
Ned Hart
Ned,
From a data standpoint, the 3560 is overkill for an access switch and a 2960should work well for your purposes. I'd make sure to get one that supports
the enhanced image for RSTP and the AutoQOS features. One main
consideration is for the VoIP - if you plan on using the POE switches, I
believe that only the 3560's will be able to do that for you. I currently
use all 3560's with POE for my VoIP devices, and then a 2950/2960 for
additional devices that will not be connected through a phone (such as Jet
Direct printers, terminal servers, etc...).
Hope that helps,
Jim
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: ASA Policy NAT Question
- Next by Date: Re: Internet Lines
- Previous by thread: Re: 2960 (layer 2) vs 3560 (layer 3) ...considerations?
- Next by thread: Re: 2960 (layer 2) vs 3560 (layer 3) ...considerations?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|