nanog mailing list archives
Re: layer 3 switch debate
From: "Stephen Sprunk" <ssprunk () cisco com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 11:58:52 -0500
Thus spake "ip dude" <ipdude () cattle-today com>
IP Community: When designing an all IP network requiring mostly Ethernet interfaces, the
logical conclusion is to specify layer 3 switches (instead of routers). The cost per port and functionality requirements make a layer 3 switch the perfect choice. However, the rule of thumb in the IP community is that routers are superior to layer 3 switches and should be utilized instead, especially when considering core type functionality.
Does this rule of thumb still apply considering the modern layer 3 switches
available? If not, why? What makes a layer 3 switch sub-standard to a pure router? Any quantitative analysis you could provide would be greatly appreciated. "switch" is a marketing term meaning fast, nothing more. Any device that operates at Layer 3 is a router by definition. Therefore, "Layer 3 switch" means "fast router". Now think about your question again. S
Current thread:
- layer 3 switch debate ip dude (Sep 26)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Richard A Steenbergen (Sep 26)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Stephen J. Wilcox (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Richard A Steenbergen (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Stephen Sprunk (Sep 27)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: layer 3 switch debate ip dude (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Stephen Sprunk (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Charles Sprickman (Sep 27)
- JUNO.COM Richard Irving (Sep 27)
- Re: layer 3 switch debate Stephen Sprunk (Sep 27)