We selected Cisco Catalyst switches because of their robustness and their ability to fulfill a specific role (access, distribution...) depending on the serie. When using different series at different layers, they perfectly interoperate in a legacy environment, as well as in a …
We choose Cisco Catalyst Switches because they give great features, very good software stability and quick TAC support.
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Cisco Catalyst 9200 Series Switches
Cisco Nexus copper switches vs. Cisco Catalyst Series Switches is often a tough call. Typically, a datacenter deployment would dictate Nexus to provide all the features and functionality, as well as stability that datacenters require; however, the cost-effective nature of the …
We selected the 9200 because of the setup. The virtual stack supports the HA capabilities and maintains the cluster instance in case of failure. The 9200 is a great switch.
Cisco Nexus switches are the Cadillac in switching. All the other switching we have and use is for lesser demanding requirements and for most cost effective implementations.
The Cisco Catalyst 9200 Series Switches are a good fit for access layer needs. Put them on the edge of your network and you will have what you need to connect a physical device to your network. I would not deploy them in places at the core of a network. They can be used in data centers as an edge connection device.
Fairly stable and easy to operate - but I haven't any experience with other brands, so I don't have anything to compare with. Fairly fast in the OS. Easy to upgrade - but with some SW issues. Sometimes clearing of log folders is needed. Access to bash is cool. Tips & cool tricks for operations could be nice to share.
Maintenance, upgrades, and software certification can be performed without service interruptions because of the modular nature of NX-OS and features such as In-Service Software Upgrade (ISSU) and the capability for processes to restart dynamically
FabricPath:
Enables each device to build an overall view of the topology; this is similar to other link state routing protocols. Each device in the FabricPath topology is identified by a switch-id. The Layer 2 forwarding tables are built based on reachability to each switch-id, not by the MAC address. Eliminates spanning-tree to maximize network bandwidth and flexibility in topological configurations, as well as simplify operational support and configuration. This enables a tremendous amount of flexibility on the topology because you can now build FabricPath topologies for Layer 2-based networks the same as for Layer 3-based networks
Overlay Transport Virtualization (OTV): Enables the Layer 2 extension between distributed data centers over any transport Layer 3 network
Implementing jumbo frames on interfaces of its fabric extender series (N2k, etc.) by editing the network QoS does not have to be a global configuration that would affect all its interfaces. It can be improved to become just an interface configuration.
Licensing on the NXOS is a bit complicated and expensive. I understand that the Nexus is made for core data center switching but it does not have to break the bank.
OTV technology is for Nexus only. Based on the advantage of the technology, it should be made vendor-neutral to accommodate other vendor devices.
We have now bought 468 switches, and we will most likely continue using this series, because it is the switch that is the cheapest for our needs. Maybe for some specific use cases, we will use the Catalyst 9300 series. Because we are more pressed on manpower, that money, we stick with what works.
We will use it for a long time, since they are switches with great capacity and positive results, they promote the perfect operation of our data center, I always recommend them, because they are switches with good results.
In our environment (and especially during COVID and the Work From Home era), I would really like our network devices to be more resilient [against} errors in remote configuration. Having a standard, easy to use, configure, commit/deploy, rollback system should be installed, but it's not there. Other companies have been providing this for over 20 years, and Cisco does this on some of their devices. Why not all?
These switches are very fast. They've been designed to work within the data center. We connect them to Cisco UCS-B Mini servers with the storage being directly attached. They are able to handle the data traffic pretty easily. We can also move servers pretty fast from data center to data center without overloading them. This has allowed our company to stay running during any kind of conditional outage. We have come to really rely on them for business continuity.
Overall, Cisco has great products and I believe that they believe in the philosophy of a great customer experience. Although there have been a few technical support issues that caused a lot of company anxiety, in most cases, Cisco has gone above and beyond in making a valiant effort to help the customer solve any issues.
The functions on Cisco Catalyst 9200 Series Switches are very responsive and its notification functions are very active and reliable in producing effective new updates on any detected data threats across the entire network flow even the network speed reports are easily presented by its alert functionalities and data analytics are impressive.
The Cisco 9000 stacks up quite well against the Cisco Catalyst 3850 switches. The additional features available in the Nexus 9000, such as VPN, FCoE, 40 gigabits, give us the ability to support the future needs of the company in our data center. The Nexus 9000 allowed us to condense our core and aggregation environment that comprised of 2 Catalyst 6504 and 2 Catalyst 6509 to a port of Nexus 9000. Although the Catalyst 3850 would be sufficient to handle routing, those features in the Nexus 9000 made it the clear choice for us.
The Nexus 3000 series switches are data center switches, so I would say they have similar security ability to other switches in this segment. I don't have a lot of experience doing more than basic ACL security on switches, but I know these can be integrated into other security solutions like Cisco ISE and 802.1x authentication. It could also be integrated into an ACI solution to add micro segmentation, which would bring in other security functions.
The positive thing is that because it has a redundant power supply, you can have users staying on for all the time. If you have a power interruption or something and you have both power supply A and B, then you're option to, you don't need users to log off or they're being cut off because you have to replace something or do something.
