HA With switches
-
@coliver said in HA With switches:
@PhlipElder said in HA With switches:
There's a very important reason why Ubiquiti's 10GbE switch is sub $1K while a purebred Cisco is orders of magnitude above that in cost. Engineering.
Or Marketing and Name Recognition.
Point taken. Indeed, there's a huge volume of dollars and folks involved on that side.
-
@Francesco-Provino said in HA With switches:
Anybody has experience with ONIE/WhiteLabel switches? Dell seems committed to it...
I was in San Jose a couple of weeks ago at the invitation of QCT for their one day product showcase event.
They are invested pretty heavily with Broadcom in the ONIE market.
We've deployed a lot of their storage products in cluster settings. They have been a solid go-to for shared SAS settings and soon QCT purpose-built Storage Spaces Direct nodes. They are worth the look.
-
@PhlipElder said in HA With switches:
We live in an era where we get what we pay for.
I've found this to be about the polar opposite of reality. Look at operating systems, the free ones are best, the paid ones are worst - not that Windows is "bad", it's just not up to par with paid options, all OSes are pretty decent today, but when the free ones do the best.... Look at networking hardware, the highest cost is Cisco which is often the worst vendor, and the cheapest reasonable ones are often the best. The higher performance processors aren't the most expensive. And on, and on.
I'd say it's more often inverted... you get the opposite of what you pay for.
-
@PhlipElder said in HA With switches:
Example: There's a very important reason why Ubiquiti's 10GbE switch is sub $1K while a purebred Cisco is orders of magnitude above that in cost. Engineering.
I'm confused, Cisco engineering is specifically a reason I don't want them in my shops. Even casual in person conversations with Cisco engineering is embarrassing. Cisco gear is expensive because they target the "stupid rich" Adams quartile. They put a high price on garbage to specific target people who believe that price, not engineering, defines quality.
None of Cisco's cost comes from engineering, it's just mark up.
That's why even if they were the same price, I'd take Ubiquiti every time. Cisco is the ultimate example of how you don't get what you pay for. That, and Windows, are the two examples we use most about how you can't use pricing as a guide to quality because it is never so dramatically inverted.
-
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@PhlipElder said in HA With switches:
We live in an era where we get what we pay for.
I've found this to be about the polar opposite of reality. Look at operating systems, the free ones are best, the paid ones are worst - not that Windows is "bad", it's just not up to par with paid options, all OSes are pretty decent today, but when the free ones do the best.... Look at networking hardware, the highest cost is Cisco which is often the worst vendor, and the cheapest reasonable ones are often the best. The higher performance processors aren't the most expensive. And on, and on.
I'd say it's more often inverted... you get the opposite of what you pay for.
There's always going to be exceptions to any rule.
We work with ISPs that deploy Catalyst switches into our client sites. There's one site where the WiFi ISP connection piggybacks off of another ISP's system. The other ISP has an ancient Catalyst that keeps locking up every once in a while. That's one example of an issue with a Cisco product yet it can't be faulted as the switch is probably way more than ten years old. We've got fibre and coax going into that business park so we'll be parking that ISP connection into a secondary role at some point so we've not really pursued a switch change with them yet ...
For the most part though, we rarely encounter issues with Catalyst switches.
But, to back up what is being said the last two hotels in different cities I've stayed in that are the same hotel chain using Cisco Meraki WiFi have been nothing but grief. Whether that particular chain has chosen to leave the on-premises WiFi die or the folks supporting it are not doing a great job or the product is just plain crap is left to be said.
-
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@PhlipElder said in HA With switches:
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@JaredBusch said in HA With switches:
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
The maker of Linksys (traditionally?) Cisco
Dude, Cisco sold off Linksys in 2013. Pay attention.
Cisco bought them in 2003.As a brand, but they kept a lot of the products in their routing, switching, and VoIP lines. They sold the name, but they kept the products. So old Linksys is now Cisco proper.
The Cisco Small Business Pro series edge (NSA 510/520 series with and without WiFi) and their SG300/SG500 series switches were the result of the Linksys purchase engineering combination.
We've deployed a lot of the SG500x series stackable switches with a few weird behaviours depending on how they are set up. Many of them fronted the disaggregate clusters mentioned above.
Yeah, we see those "Cisco rebranded Linksys" units all over the place. They are awful.
I've got a few
-
@PhlipElder said in HA With switches:
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@PhlipElder said in HA With switches:
We live in an era where we get what we pay for.
I've found this to be about the polar opposite of reality. Look at operating systems, the free ones are best, the paid ones are worst - not that Windows is "bad", it's just not up to par with paid options, all OSes are pretty decent today, but when the free ones do the best.... Look at networking hardware, the highest cost is Cisco which is often the worst vendor, and the cheapest reasonable ones are often the best. The higher performance processors aren't the most expensive. And on, and on.
I'd say it's more often inverted... you get the opposite of what you pay for.
There's always going to be exceptions to any rule.
We work with ISPs that deploy Catalyst switches into our client sites. There's one site where the WiFi ISP connection piggybacks off of another ISP's system. The other ISP has an ancient Catalyst that keeps locking up every once in a while. That's one example of an issue with a Cisco product yet it can't be faulted as the switch is probably way more than ten years old. We've got fibre and coax going into that business park so we'll be parking that ISP connection into a secondary role at some point so we've not really pursued a switch change with them yet ...
For the most part though, we rarely encounter issues with Catalyst switches.
Old is old, anything ancient is going to start having problems either from lack of updates, wear and tear, or just general aging.
-
@PhlipElder said in HA With switches:
But, to back up what is being said the last two hotels in different cities I've stayed in that are the same hotel chain using Cisco Meraki WiFi have been nothing but grief. Whether that particular chain has chosen to leave the on-premises WiFi die or the folks supporting it are not doing a great job or the product is just plain crap is left to be said.
Yeah, we typically remove Meraki and install Ubiquiti. Customers ask us to fix something and find that the price tag of a new install is often less than keeping what they already have. Meraki typically works fine, but the cost is just absurd.
-
@hobbit666 said in HA With switches:
So a close up on the Edge switch there will be 2 cables coming in. 1 from Core1 and 1 from Core2.Do i need to configure something special on the switch or will modern switches just know they are coming from switches that are stacked in HA mode?
So just to confirm my thinking,
Ignoring what the Core switches will be for now. If i have one SPF+ Fibre/Copper from Core1 and other from Core2 going into the two SPF+ ports on the EdgeSwitch and i have Spanning Tree and Trunk them correctly, this should be fine?
As when i compare a Netgear S3300 48 port to the 48 port Edgeswitch there is about £300 difference (Netgear being more expensive). -
@hobbit666 Netgear's matching model would not be the S3300 but the GC752X.
Which is $500, so probably a bit cheaper again.
-
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@hobbit666 Netgear's matching model would not be the S3300 but the GC752X.
Which is $500, so probably a bit cheaper again.
So is that GC752X better than the S3300?
-
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@hobbit666 Netgear's matching model would not be the S3300 but the GC752X
Wouldn't it be the GC752XP model as the EdgeSwitch has PoE
-
@hobbit666 said in HA With switches:
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@hobbit666 Netgear's matching model would not be the S3300 but the GC752X.
Which is $500, so probably a bit cheaper again.
So is that GC752X better than the S3300?
It's at least the model meant to be comparable. It's much newer, as well.
-
@hobbit666 said in HA With switches:
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@hobbit666 Netgear's matching model would not be the S3300 but the GC752X
Wouldn't it be the GC752XP model as the EdgeSwitch has PoE
If you are looking for PoE, yes.
-
@hobbit666 said in HA With switches:
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@hobbit666 Netgear's matching model would not be the S3300 but the GC752X
Wouldn't it be the GC752XP model as the EdgeSwitch has PoE
Edgeswitches come in non PoE too.
-
@Donahue said in HA With switches:
@hobbit666 said in HA With switches:
@scottalanmiller said in HA With switches:
@hobbit666 Netgear's matching model would not be the S3300 but the GC752X
Wouldn't it be the GC752XP model as the EdgeSwitch has PoE
Edgeswitches come in non PoE too.
Yeah, that's why I compared the base model.
-
So how did the final price comparison come out?
-
Any opinion on Dell all-sfp switches? The "S" series...
-
@Francesco-Provino said in HA With switches:
Any opinion on Dell all-sfp switches? The "S" series...
Doesn’t Ubiquiti have those too?
-
@Dashrender said in HA With switches:
@Francesco-Provino said in HA With switches:
Any opinion on Dell all-sfp switches? The "S" series...
Doesn’t Ubiquiti have those too?
Yes, but only low density. They max out at 12 ports.
