Solved

stacking versus cascading switches

Posted on 2002-06-07
7
3,555 Views
Last Modified: 2008-03-06
What exactly is the technical difference between stacking and cascading Cisco switches besides the fact that stacking results in a logical switch which is managed as a single switch? What are the implications on performance of using the stack port as opposed to cascading using uplink fast ethernet ports?
0
Comment
Question by:Wyse
  • 5
7 Comments
 
LVL 11

Accepted Solution

by:
geoffryn earned 50 total points
ID: 7062400
Usually stackable switches have back plane connections that allow the inter switch links to exceed 100 mb.  In a cascade scenario, you can see bottle necks at the uplinked ports.
0
 
LVL 1

Expert Comment

by:Nomad469
ID: 7064966
If you rare running 2900 or 3500 xl and you want to go cheep do the uplink cascade (it costs you ports...for 9 switches you loose 9 ports) plus the cpu load of pushing 9 trunks (if you are running Vlans)

If you want to spend the dollars go with the gigastack... you can get 1-Gbps independent stack backplane in a cascade configuration...and as your needs go you can add 3508s and get a lot more flexability .



0
 
LVL 1

Expert Comment

by:Nomad469
ID: 7065050
If you rare running 2900 or 3500 xl and you want to go cheep do the uplink cascade (it costs you ports...for 9 switches you loose 9 ports) plus the cpu load of pushing 9 trunks (if you are running Vlans)

If you want to spend the dollars go with the gigastack... you can get 1-Gbps independent stack backplane in a cascade configuration...and as your needs go you can add 3508s and get a lot more flexability .



0
PRTG Network Monitor: Intuitive Network Monitoring

Network Monitoring is essential to ensure that computer systems and network devices are running. Use PRTG to monitor LANs, servers, websites, applications and devices, bandwidth, virtual environments, remote systems, IoT, and many more. PRTG is easy to set up & use.

 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:jgarr
ID: 7065355
If you are buying new, do you have any reason why you wouldn't consider a 4000 series switch? Port density is higher, and it has capability of dual power, etc.
If you are adding switches to existing, cascading or stacking may be the right thing to do financially, but buying a 4000 series might not be much more in cost.
0
 
LVL 1

Expert Comment

by:Nomad469
ID: 7066385
True...but cost is going to be the big player...I have a 4006 with a 72 10/100 ports (36 with power for IP phones) 3X power and a PRI gateway...Great switch but over 60K after all said and done.  I think the switch is base at about 24K I could be wrong though.

If the need is just ports as opposed to more advanced features... I would be more inclined to go with gigalinks than the 4000 upto the cost breakpoint.

0
 
LVL 1

Expert Comment

by:Nomad469
ID: 7066386
True...but cost is going to be the big player...I have a 4006 with a 72 10/100 ports (36 with power for IP phones) 3X power and a PRI gateway...Great switch but over 60K after all said and done.  I think the switch is base at about 24K I could be wrong though.

If the need is just ports as opposed to more advanced features... I would be more inclined to go with gigalinks than the 4000 upto the cost breakpoint.

0
 
LVL 1

Expert Comment

by:Nomad469
ID: 7068574
True...but cost is going to be the big player...I have a 4006 with a 72 10/100 ports (36 with power for IP phones) 3X power and a PRI gateway...Great switch but over 60K after all said and done.  I think the switch is base at about 24K I could be wrong though.

If the need is just ports as opposed to more advanced features... I would be more inclined to go with gigalinks than the 4000 upto the cost breakpoint.

0

Featured Post

Is Your Active Directory as Secure as You Think?

More than 75% of all records are compromised because of the loss or theft of a privileged credential. Experts have been exploring Active Directory infrastructure to identify key threats and establish best practices for keeping data safe. Attend this month’s webinar to learn more.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Suggested Solutions

New Server 172.16.200.2  was moved from behind Router R2 f0/1 to behind router R1 int f/01 and has now address 172.16.100.2. But we want users still to be able to connected to it by old IP. How to do it ? We can used destination NAT (DNAT).  In DNAT…
Quality of Service (QoS) options are nearly endless when it comes to networks today. This article is merely one example of how it can be handled in a hub-n-spoke design using a 3-tier configuration.
After creating this article (http://www.experts-exchange.com/articles/23699/Setup-Mikrotik-routers-with-OSPF.html), I decided to make a video (no audio) to show you how to configure the routers and run some trace routes and pings between the 7 sites…
After creating this article (http://www.experts-exchange.com/articles/23699/Setup-Mikrotik-routers-with-OSPF.html), I decided to make a video (no audio) to show you how to configure the routers and run some trace routes and pings between the 7 sites…

910 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question

Need Help in Real-Time?

Connect with top rated Experts

22 Experts available now in Live!

Get 1:1 Help Now