nanog mailing list archives

Re: Advice regarding Cisco/Juniper/HP


From: Andrew Thrift <andrew () networklabs co nz>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:40:04 +1200



> From a technical point of view, I have never worked in a shop that used HP
or 3Com for the infrastructure.  Dot-com's, telco's, bank's, hosting
companies...I haven't seen any of them using 3com or HP.  Additionally, I'm
not fond of having to deal with a third set of equipment.  I'm not exactly
comfortable going with HP, but I'd like some data to help resolve the
debate.
I work with networking products from all of the mentioned vendors on a daily basis. HP Networking (was ProCurve) make a solid SME switching product, it is comparable to Cisco 2000/3000 series switches, they also have chassis switches such as the 54xx/82xx, however these lack a lot of the more advanced features available from Cisco and Juniper, and have significant hardware limitations e.g. backplane bandwidth. HP also do not have decent stackable switches, which will be a concern if you want to split LACP trunks across multiple switches/chassis.

Another major negative with the HP gear for us is that their switches only support SFP/SFP+ modules manufactured by HP, so those SFP+ Twin-AX cables that came with your Dell/IBM Blade chassis will be useless to connect to your HP Switches, to add insult HP often sell their own modules at 3x the price of an equivalent module from say Extreme or Juniper.

So my questions to the NANOG community are: Would you recommend HP over
Cisco or Juniper?  How is HP's functionality and performance compared to
Cisco or Juniper?  Does anyone have any HP networking experiences they can
share, good or bad?

My reccomendation would be, use Juniper for Core and Aggregation with ProCurve at the edge.



Regards,




Andrew



Current thread: