Sorry, I am Cisco newbie but I need some help here:
I have a small network environment with one layer 3 Catalyst 3750 and two Catalyst 3560s running VLANs across them. All switches are placed in the same network rack.
There is some debate about how best to connect them together:
a) with LC fibre cables and SFP fibre adapters.
b) with CAT5e cables and SFP Gigabit adapters.
c) with Cisco Interconnect cables (but unfortunately we already have a bucket load of SFP gbic adapters, so I'd rather use them if possible).
Obviously the fibre SFP adapters and cables are a lot more expensive than the CAT5 equivalents and the interconnect cables.
My questions is:
1) Is there any benefit of using fibre to interconnect them over such a short distance? (they're located above/below each other in the same rack!). If so, what are the benefits?
My understanding is that fibre really only offers better latency which is important over longer distances, and the SFP ports are gigabit no matter if you use fibre or CAT5e the speed is the same - therefore I can see no point in interconnecting them with fibre - but then again, I am not a Cisco expert.
Help much appreciated!
The use of fibre optic against Cat5e began to become popular when used to span different floors and/or building. Unlike Cat5e which has a limit of 100 metres, specific fibre optic cables can go from short range (multi-mode) to long range (single-mode). Now if budget permits, I would always choose uplinks or inter-connection to be fibre optic over copper (Cat5/Cat5e or Cat6).
If fibre optic isn't feasible then get Cat6 instead.
Fiber is always better than copper in terms of being less propense to interference.
Fiber is more expensive and difficult to implement than just CAT5 cables, but if you have the fiber already, go for it.