I work for a small web-dev consulting firm. a couple of years ago they had a network infrastructure consultant come in and do a build-out which was a total pooch-screw.. they spent waaaay too much on equipment that was either unnecessary, or overkill, in my opinion. to add salt to the wound, they also ended up getting the wrong equipment.
i was recently hired and although it's not my job per se' i'm helping them revamp their infrastructure to what they really need and to help future-proof them for a little while. sorry for the lengthy post, just trying to be thorough.
they're current setup comprises of an ASA5500 (not even being used), a 2911 router (don't know how it's config'd), an sg200-2? switch, and wifi is handled through a xirrus (i know...) AP. not only is the hardware wrong, but the config for the hardware is wrong.
this brings me to the most important part; we don't have phones, we use google voice and even if QOS was enabled, because of the way the hardware is configured, it's nullified.
we are going to upgrade to a layer 3 switch. i'm seriously looking at the sg300 (b/c i have one at home and think it would be great for this place), but they're also wondering about a catalyst series switch.
what are the QOS capabilities of each switch? is there an advantage to the catalyst? google voice runs on port 5222 and i was thinking i could assigne QOS priority to any app that calls on port 5222.
figure there are 30 people at any given time, but all using wifi. our ap does have the strength to handle the throughput but QOS needs to be addressed.
What would a L3 switch do that your current switch doesn't ?
Is the current switch struggling in terms of throughput etc ?
I ask because you already have kit that may be able to do what you want depending on the above. Certainly your router will give you a fuller QOS feature set than pretty much any Catalyst switch would.
A L3 switches primary purpose is to route between vlans so for a site where there are multiple vlans it is a good choice but from the number of people you have mentioned (even with future growth) there doesn't seem to be a need for a lot of vlans.
And if you needed a few vlans you can always route these off the router.
You do seem to have redundant kit ie. you could run a firewall on the router and not need the ASA, or alternatively simply use the ASA (although it's QOS may not be as fully feaured), but i'm not clear on why you think a L3 switch is the solution ?
Question We run asr9001 with XR 6.1.3, and we have a very long delay to
login w/ SSH 1 or 2 to the device compare to IOS device. After
investigation, the there is 1s delay between the client KEXDH_INIT and
the server (XR) KEXDH_REPLY. After debug ssh serv...
Introduction The purpose of this document is to demonstrate the Open
Shortest Path First (OSPF) behavior when the V-bit (Virtual-link bit) is
present in a non-backbone area. The V-bit is signaled in Type-1 LSA only
if the router is the endpoint of one or ...
Hi, I am seeing quite a few issues with patch install and wanted to
share my experience and workaround to this. Login to admin via CLI, then
access root with the “shell” command Issue “df –h” and you’ll probably
see the following directory full or nearly ...