Seeking Opinions on 4000 w/ Sup3 vs. 6500 w/ Sup2/MSFC2

[ebanksdhhs]

We're in our budget cycle, and I have 4 tired Enterasys SSR's in our core to replace. What's your opinion of the 4000 series with the Supervisor 3 engine vs. the 6500 series with the Supervisor 2 engine and MSFC? These devices will be used as a core switch router in an enterprise WAN supporting 3,200+ ethernet nodes. We currently route IP (OSPF) & IPX (RIP).

I realize a huge selling point for a 6500 is the redundant supervisor engines - it's also quite pricey. Beyond that, however, can you comment on how the administration of the 4000 goes vs. the 6500? Are they separate interfaces, as with the 6500 where you see IOS for routing, and CatOS for switching, but they share VLAN's? Any other insight is welcome. My local Cisco rep can't seem to get me an eval unit, so I'm stuck trying to gather information without the benefit of hands-on.

[rfroom]

The catalyst 4000 SupIII is an excellant router/switch. However, it will not support routing of IPX until later this summer. The Catalyst 4000 SupIII runs pure IOS, there is no CatOS. Every port is an interface and can be configured as switch port or a router port. You can also configure VLAN interfaces (SVI) on the 4000. It is very similiar to the native IOS software for the cat6500.

[chcosta]

We're also comparing these two models for GE distribution. The 4006 w/ SUP III doesn't support IPX or AT, so that may be a selling point for you right there. The 4006 w/ supIII only runs Native mode IOS. Chris