Layer3 Switch, or Router and unmanaged switches

stephen.smith · ‎08-03-2012

I want to create 6 subnets at one site. I want them to talk to each other. Do I get 1 router, and many unmanaged switches, or do I get a Layer3 Switch.

branfarm1 · ‎08-03-2012

In my experience, the less devices you have to manage, the easier it is to run things. So if a L3 switch with the required port-density is in your budget, I'd go for the single device. It also depends on your redundancy requirements and such, but in my opinion even two L3 switches vs 4 unmanaged switches would be better.

Jan Hrnko · ‎08-03-2012

Hello Stephen,

Do you want to apply some extra policies or features to that? As we know, L3 switches are far more faster than routers (L3 switches use ASICs thus making packet switching to occur in hardware rather than in software on cpu, like routers do) . So if you want to achieve better performance, use L3 switch instead of Router-On-A-Stick (Of course speed can differ from device to device ).

Why 1 router and many unmanaged switches? You said that everything is at one site. You can get just one unmanaged switch and create VLANs there + use router as Router-On-A-Stick, no problem with that at all. Routers do usually have more features than switches - but for the price of speed.

Best regards,

Jan

Leo Laohoo · ‎08-04-2012

I want to create 6 subnets at one site.  I want them to talk to each other.  Do I get 1 router, and many unmanaged switches, or do I get a Layer3 Switch.

Don't make any sense to have a router (to route 6 subnets) and stick all your clients in an UN-managed switch.

If you run six subnets, then chances are, you have 6 VLANs. If this is so, how can you determine which VLAN each port in an unmanaged switch?

What you need to pair up with your router is a MANAGED switch that will support multiple VLANs.

Joseph W. Doherty · ‎08-04-2012

Disclaimer

The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.

Liability Disclaimer

In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.

Posting

For LAN routing, and for LAN bandwidths, you'll probably want a L3 switch. This because, at least in the Cisco line-up, Cisco's low-end software based routers don't normally well support LAN aggregate bandwidths beyond a couple of FastEtherenet ports.

NB: As unmanaged switches generally don't support VLANs, you would be only able to isolate your multiple subnets either using different ports on a router or L3 switch.

jimmysands73_2 · ‎08-04-2012

>>In my experience, the less devices you have to manage, the easier it is to run things.

Unmanaged switches mean unmanaged users, unmanaged users can bring down a network quick. I know in some SOHO environments small unmanaged DLink/Netgear/etc switches make sense, but from having six subnet's maybe your environment falls into the small - medium business class. And as others have pointed out, unmanaged switches do not support multiple vlans to say the least.

branfarm1 · ‎08-04-2012

Let me clarify my statement -- I didn't mean to suggest using unmanaged vs managed devices. I certainly recommend using managed devices. What I meant was the fewer quantity of devices you have to administer, the lower your overhead will be. i.e. If you can get away buying one device, then that will make your life easier, typically, than buying multiple devices to accomplish the same job.