Buying a Bunch of Switches (HP vs. Cisco vs. Netgear and managed vs. "smart")

[Seanny]

Hey Anandtech,

I'm looking to buy one L3 switch (either managed or "smart", there seems to be a large price difference between the two). Basically, I work for a small (300 users) non-profit independent ISP that's looking to move away from a non-managed layer 2 network, to a segmented Layer 3 network, for better security, protection from botnets and easier management.

Currently, I'm shying away from Cisco (despite being a CCNA) because of their rather expensive support and short warranty. I'm interested by HP's lifetime warranty and my employer really likes Netgear switches.

I was wondering if anyone here had any favourites or if anyone had any experiences with "smart" vs. managed. If this stuff really interests you, you can check out the details below, but feel free to just share your experiences.

Requirements (if you're curious):
-QoS
-Vlan support (tagging and trunking)
-SNMPv3 management
-One L3 (16-24 100mb/s ports with 4 GigE ports), static routes are fine
-A couple L2's (8-16 ports 100 mb/s)
-Port mirroring
-Easily replaced/maintained
-Good warranty and support
-Centralized authentication

Link to spreadsheet (if you're hardcore):
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ane4kGv2b1RAdE81dEt1d0FpVGdqMUlZUmFYdEdvQnc#gid=0

Thanks for your help,
Seanny

P.S. Please let me know if I've posted in the wrong forum and feel free to grumble and point me towards where I should be posting.

 

[Zxian]

While I haven't dealt with anything on quite that large of a scale, my experiences with Netgear products and support has been stellar. In my largest deployment a while back, I used a SRX5308 in conjunction with a GS724TP for a mid-sized office environment. The management interfaces for Netgear products is straightforward and simply works. In the few instances where something doesn't work, their support is quick to respond and will either provide the correct instructions or in certain cases, updated firmware to resolve the issue.

I'm running a WNDR3700 at home with a couple of GS108E switches around the house.

 

[theevilsharpie]

The primary difference between "smart" switches and "managed" switches is that the "smart" switches generally can't be managed from a command-line interface. If you're only buying one or two switches, that's not that big of a deal, but if you're buying more than a handful, using a web interface will quickly become a chore.

Some models of smart switches lack a console port (a lot of Netgears were like this), which means you can inadvertently lock yourself out of the switch if you make a configuration change that breaks network connectivity to the management address.

Some of your switches are listed as Layer 3 capable, but are only capable of handling a few static routes. For anything but the smallest networks with no plans for future growth, I would treat them as Layer 2 switches unless they have full dynamic routing capability.

Unless you're absolutely starving for cash or you need to support PoE devices, I wouldn't purchase anything other than GigE switches. GigE is substantially faster than 10/100 Ethernet, and doesn't cost much more.

You're a non-profit, so you may be able to buy discounted hardware. In the US, non-profits can purchase equipment from Tech Soup for prices so low that it pisses me off.

With respect to various brands:

HP: HP has combined their in-house ProCurve brand with their acquisition of 3Com/H3C and rebranded them all as HP switches. I've been very pleased with the HP ProCurve line. My experience with 3Com is that they have a lot of functionality for the price, but the interface can be a bit convoluted. I don't have any personal experience with H3C, but I've read good things about their newer gear. One negative aspect of HP's rebranding is that it's more difficult to find information/discussions about the switches online. Also, H3C was primarily a Chinese brand, so a lot of community discussion may not be in English.

Cisco: I haven't used any modern Cisco Small Business gear, but their past efforts haven't been very impressive. Real Cisco gear is decent, but pricey.

Extreme Networks: Don't have any experience with them.

Netgear: I've used a few of their higher-end managed switches (including the 48-port PoE switch in your document), and while they were generally reliable, the interface was incredibly sluggish and generally a pain to use.

 

[drebo]

Cisco's L3 switches are hugely expensive. A 3750 w/ IP Services will set you back a cool $6k.

On the other hand, a Juniper EX3200 is quite inexpensive by comparison.

On the topic of warranty, you have to be careful. Yes, HP's default warranty is lifetime, but if you read the fine print, their replacement terms are 10 business day. Same with Netgear, and same with Cisco (Cisco Catalyst switches do actually also have a lifetime warranty). Juniper's are the same way, but faster replacement policies are fairly cheap.

I would shy away from anything that doesn't have a serial port in it.

 

[imagoon]

HP: HP has combined their in-house ProCurve brand with their acquisition of 3Com/H3C and rebranded them all as HP switches. I've been very pleased with the HP ProCurve line. My experience with 3Com is that they have a lot of functionality for the price, but the interface can be a bit convoluted. I don't have any personal experience with H3C, but I've read good things about their newer gear. One negative aspect of HP's rebranding is that it's more difficult to find information/discussions about the switches online. Also, H3C was primarily a Chinese brand, so a lot of community discussion may not be in English.

Cisco: I haven't used any modern Cisco Small Business gear, but their past efforts haven't been very impressive. Real Cisco gear is decent, but pricey.

Extreme Networks: Don't have any experience with them.

Netgear: I've used a few of their higher-end managed switches (including the 48-port PoE switch in your document), and while they were generally reliable, the interface was incredibly sluggish and generally a pain to use.

Extreme, at least all the ones I dealt with were junk. They liked to crash, even when stacked. One controller would crash and the entire stack died rather than the fail over switch taking over.

Netgear:
Mixed bag. Some work like champs but the interfaces tended to suck. Others were better suited for adjusting the height of my computer screen.

Cisco:
Rare that a switch crashes for years as long as the power is good. 3-5 years of uptime is not unheard of, it is even "normal."

HP:
Generally work well they tend to be configured backwards to Cisco. I can generally figure something out with them, it just seems "odd" to me.

 

[Solomutt]

Look into Dell's offerings. I bought a couple of them, and was surprised at the features for the price. You will want to run a routing protocol to route VLANS. You may think you won't but you will. OSPF is the common protocol for non-Cisco, and is supported on Dells. They offer iSCSI support for when you end up growing to a SAN or similar.

I prefer Cisco, but the Dell offerings seem too compelling on a budget, in the mediun sized company space.

With 300 employyees, I really want you to consider a 4500/6500 series switch. One properly loaded 6509 switch could support the whole enterprise. Yes, it is expensive as heck, but the level of redundancy and support is very high. With so many people, you may be stuck putting in multiple switches due to distance. If that is the case, you could buy the Dells, and, if you are careful to back up your configs after any changes, have a spare or two ready if there is an outage.

 

[CombatChuk]

Hey Anandtech,

I'm looking to buy one L3 switch (either managed or "smart", there seems to be a large price difference between the two). Basically, I work for a small (300 users) non-profit independent ISP that's looking to move away from a non-managed layer 2 network, to a segmented Layer 3 network, for better security, protection from botnets and easier management.

Currently, I'm shying away from Cisco (despite being a CCNA) because of their rather expensive support and short warranty. I'm interested by HP's lifetime warranty and my employer really likes Netgear switches.

I was wondering if anyone here had any favourites or if anyone had any experiences with "smart" vs. managed. If this stuff really interests you, you can check out the details below, but feel free to just share your experiences.

Requirements (if you're curious):
-QoS
-Vlan support (tagging and trunking)
-SNMPv3 management
-One L3 (16-24 100mb/s ports with 4 GigE ports), static routes are fine
-A couple L2's (8-16 ports 100 mb/s)
-Port mirroring
-Easily replaced/maintained
-Good warranty and support
-Centralized authentication

Link to spreadsheet (if you're hardcore):
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ane4kGv2b1RAdE81dEt1d0FpVGdqMUlZUmFYdEdvQnc#gid=0

Thanks for your help,
Seanny

P.S. Please let me know if I've posted in the wrong forum and feel free to grumble and point me towards where I should be posting.

As other people have said, HP switches are really 3Com switches. They're not bad

Cisco stuff is $ (Service contracts are $$$$) but they're the standard in the industry. If you ever hire a Network Engineer off the street they'll know how to use it right away.

I've had a lot of experience with Extreme Networks switches. They're fairly cheap and robust. I worked for a MetroE company that used them exclusively for Metro Rings and CPEs. They had a similar rate of failure to Cisco switches.

Juniper/Dell Switches are the same thing. Dell buys Juniper switches and throws their logo on it. They run JUNOS (which I love), they're cheaper than Ciscos but more expensive than Extremes.

 

[drebo]

Juniper/Dell Switches are the same thing. Dell buys Juniper switches and throws their logo on it. They run JUNOS (which I love), they're cheaper than Ciscos but more expensive than Extremes.

No they're not. Dell used to have a line of rebranded Juniper switches, but that ended when Dell bought Force10.

Dell still has their old crappy switches and they used to supplement that with a line of rebranded Junipers. Now they supplement it with a line of rebranded Force10.

Either way, they suck. I've had lots of problems with Dell switches forgetting which VLANs are supposed to be tagged on ports, etc. Sure, their featureset is good, but I wouldn't trust my network to them except in a very small network.

 

[imagoon]

No they're not. Dell used to have a line of rebranded Juniper switches, but that ended when Dell bought Force10.

Dell still has their old crappy switches and they used to supplement that with a line of rebranded Junipers. Now they supplement it with a line of rebranded Force10.

Either way, they suck. I've had lots of problems with Dell switches forgetting which VLANs are supposed to be tagged on ports, etc. Sure, their featureset is good, but I wouldn't trust my network to them except in a very small network.

Dell is completely hit or miss. It is annoying. 6224? Run like tanks. older 2716? Managed mode = have a fun ride! I had a couple of those that eventually ended up in dumb swithc mode doing nothing but terminating Dell DRAC cards because of the issues Drebo mentioned.

 

[robmurphy]

Cisco SMB switches are much better these days. They are not aimed at installs for 300 users though. One thing to consider is that the SF300 and SG300 range wipe the floor with any Netgear. They are better than the equivelant procurve, and they have the same warranty.

Tolly did a comparison with Cisco Netgear and HP. The Cisco came first in practically all tests.

My point is that if the best of the SMB switches is not advised for an install of 300 users then you should
be looking above SMB switches.

Just for the record the Cisco SMB 300 range does L3
routing using static routes and they have a serial port.

Rob.

 

[xSauronx]

Cisco SMB switches are much better these days. They are not aimed at installs for 300 users though. One thing to consider is that the SF300 and SG300 range wipe the floor with any Netgear. They are better than the equivelant procurve, and they have the same warranty.

Tolly did a comparison with Cisco Netgear and HP. The Cisco came first in practically all tests.

My point is that if the best of the SMB switches is not advised for an install of 300 users then you should
be looking above SMB switches.

Just for the record the Cisco SMB 300 range does L3
routing using static routes and they have a serial port.

Rob.

my company has deployed the SB300s to a couple of customers recently...i dont think we will be using them again.

If you have a smallish, simple network they are probably fine. They run some firmware that is a mock-ios, sort of. My company has had bad experiences at both customer sites we sold them too, i think related to smart-port roles.

I was working at a site that has a UC540 and 2 SB300 switches and was having some odd dhcp/vlan issues that i posted about a few weeks ago. TAC couldnt even figure out *Why* the issues were occurring, just that smart port roles had something to do with it.

The other site I am not familiar with. I was told partially the smart port roles were causing issue (i am not familiar with these roles and did not set up either site) and that the backplane was not of sufficient capacity for high network loads.

Regarding procurves, a large customer of ours uses them extensively and the boss and network guy seem to like them. The very entry level ones, i forget the mode right now, have no CLI and the web gui is not very good. I would shy away from the very entry level models (but i guess this echoes an earlier sentiment of stay away from something without a serial/cli)

 

[robmurphy]

I'm not sure what switch you mean. SB300?

I do not use the smart port functionality. I prefer to set the VLAN manually. I did look at smart ports but it did not offer what I needed.

We have SF300-24P (POE FE ports) deployed with many customers and have had no issues with them. We also have the SG300-52 (non POE GE ports) deployed again with no issues.

My main point however is that a 300 user site should not be done with SMB switches. You are going to need 13 or 14 switches using 24 port switches, or 7 48 port switches at the edge. You then need to control all these edge switches. For 300 users I would expect at least 2 switches to connect them, and setup so if one switch is down none of the edge switches loose connection. This means some kind of redundant setup. I know enough on this to say I don't know.

Rob.

 

[alkemyst]

Cisco owns the route switch market, however; not everyone needs that level.

I think Cisco may have non-profit discounts.

I thought all Cisco's main switch route gear got lifetime warranty.