Using Cisco Catalyst Switches we get a homegenous network for easy central administration and integration with our tool set. We also know that replacing a product series with another from Cisco always provide roughly the same form factor and physical requirements so we don't …
Cisco and Arista are comparable, however the Catalyst family has many more configurations and options. Arista's campus switches don't have as many options.
Core and data center applications are the strengths of Arista products. The distribution layer is also a good fit. For the access layer, it would be more of a niche product.
So in every scenario where you have to take one port and create, make it so that you can have more devices connected. So there will be like in a normal office area where you have an internet connection and you have to have 40 or 20 clients connected. That's where definitely Catalyst Switches becomes a very important part of this. The whole thing, scenarios where it's not very usable, I can't really see a scenario where you wouldn't be needing a switch to. There would be a very unlikely scenario because mostly you would need to connect more than one device to a router or something like that. So you would need to have a switch scenario I would say. Then it would be in some sort of scenario where you only had a need to have a directly connection to a router or something else where you wouldn't need to have more ports. So like a peer to peer connection or something like that. But I can't really see any other scenario where wouldn't you wouldn't be needing a switch.
I think the switch is a fast switch. What we also admire about it is the enhanced power over ethernet functionality. It has higher power levels to be used for wireless, for other products that use the power over ethernet, the quick uplinks, 10 gig uplinks, the possibility to run other applications on it, like a thousand eyes clients, and so on.
They are consistently reliable and this switch in particular is a very affordable solution. We can place the Cisco Catalyst 1000 Series Switches gear in areas that we normally would not place a switch because it is affordable enough to make it justifiable. And because it is a reliable solution, we are confident it will continue to provide service over the long haul.
The usability will feel natural to frequent Cisco users and a bit harder to navigate if you're new to the system. If you're limited to a small rack, maybe even in a not climate controlled environment the fan-less models with less energy consumption are a pro. With PoE you can deploy your network hardware anywhere you have a network socket: Thin Clients, APs, Sensors, you name it. The integrated power monitoring tells you how much power each client consumes and how much you have left.
We have had very few unplanned outages with all of our Cisco Catalyst products. The biggest issue I have seen is when a device has been powered on for a very long time and it gets powered off and reused later. Sometimes, the switch will not come back up. In most cases, these are switches that are way past end of life. I can't say we have really seen any other issues with the availability of the Catalyst family of switches
No, the packets flow. Sometimes you will see collisions and broadcast storms can happen which will slow performance but that can be fixed and the packets will flow.
So far we haven't had very many support issues with our Catalyst switches. When we have had issues TAC is always a pleasure to work with. They're prompt, knowledgeable, and take ownership of the case from open to close. Also, this isn't attributed to Cisco support directly. But because they are so widely known and have such a great market share you can find a solution to almost any issue with a quick internet search.
I prefer in person training. For me I understand things and the ability to ask someone helps. This particular training was a large class and it was a bit busy. However, I do prefer in person training to online. I have taken many online courses, and while they do offer a lot more info at an affordable price, there is sometimes a place for the personal touch.
We upgraded from an older catalyst model to a newer one. The implementation was pretty much seamless as the newer switches supported all the features as the old ones. These features included OSPF, HSRP, MPLS, LDP, MP-BGP, etc. One issue we say with the newer switches was that the buffers needed to be tuned. The default settings were dropping packets to a slower link. Once we change the 'qos softmax' command settings, we were able to resolve that issue.
I have used the Catalyst 6500 series in the past. From my point of view, the Arista surpasses the Catalyst on just about every front. Originally we were planning on implementing the Nexus 7000/7700 series switches for our core. Though a little more feature rich, it did not provide features we needed that the Arista did. The Nexus also was a confusing and complex platform to work with. Also, the Nexus was a significantly more expensive solution. Although very happy with the Arista switches we may evaluate the Aruba HPE 8400 chassis-based switches along with Arista switches in the future.
If I were to compare the Catalyst to the Meraki, I do feel more secure about the Catalyst, as Meraki was not originally a cisco product and was acquired. So, from the point of security and dependability, the Catalyst is a winner.
The product line is very complete and flexible. Supporting anything from small to larger modular solutions. Need PoE? Need 25Gb or faster fiber? Catalyst has you covered in all areas we can think of. Compact form factor? Industrial use? Cisco Catalyst has something that fits any scenario. And we can expect the same features, configuration and integrations to work no matter what.
