Re: 2960 (layer 2) vs 3560 (layer 3) ...considerations?
- From: "Ned" <nedhart@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 15 Sep 2006 10:55:18 -0700
Thanks. I'll look into the enhanced image.
Scooby wrote:
"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 2960
should 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
.
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: IOS and destination NAT
- Next by Date: DNS Issue over Site -Site VPN Tunnel.
- Previous by thread: Re: 2960 (layer 2) vs 3560 (layer 3) ...considerations?
- Next by thread: AS5400 upgrade and does not send all VSA's to radius
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|