is CISCO Catalyst 2924M XL 10/100 a good choice for Sun UltraSPARCs?

is CISCO Catalyst 2924M XL 10/100 a good choice for Sun UltraSPARCs?

Post by Chin Fa » Sun, 14 Feb 1999 04:00:00



We are getting more and more Ultra IIi based systems; all come with
10/100 Mbps autosensing fast eithernet on board.  The existing switch
for our group is still an oldish 3Com LinkSwitch 3000 that has 24
switched 10 Mbps ports, kind of waste given the potential of our
Ultra IIi based systems.  We are thinking about getting a CISCO
Catalyst 2924M XL 10/100 Mbps switch, and wonder whether anyone
has had good/bad experience with this particular model?

Digging around CISCO's web site, as far as I can tell this is the
most appropriate workgroup 10/100 Mbps switch for us.  Any other
suggestions?

Regards,

Chin Fang

 
 
 

is CISCO Catalyst 2924M XL 10/100 a good choice for Sun UltraSPARCs?

Post by root » Sun, 21 Feb 1999 04:00:00



> We are getting more and more Ultra IIi based systems; all come with
> 10/100 Mbps autosensing fast eithernet on board.  The existing switch
> for our group is still an oldish 3Com LinkSwitch 3000 that has 24
> switched 10 Mbps ports, kind of waste given the potential of our
> Ultra IIi based systems.  We are thinking about getting a CISCO
> Catalyst 2924M XL 10/100 Mbps switch, and wonder whether anyone
> has had good/bad experience with this particular model?

> Digging around CISCO's web site, as far as I can tell this is the
> most appropriate workgroup 10/100 Mbps switch for us.  Any other
> suggestions?

> Regards,

> Chin Fang


Cisco generally have very good network hardware. I would make sure that
there is
know inoperateability problems with exist network device. For example
network
device with  different and untested IOS could cause problems. If your IP
Router/Hub
that you will be using for a  link to outside network is from a
difference vender,
check with both vender to make sure there is know inoperateablitily
problems.

 
 
 

1. Linux bonding + Cisco catalyst 3500 XL

Folks,

I have a Linux server running RH6.2 with 2 gigabit NICs
(acenic, e1000) and a Cisco catalyst 3500 XL gigabit
switch. I tried to follow the steps in "/usr/src/linux/
Documentations/networking/bonding.txt" to aggregate two
links.

     +--------+       +---+
     | Linux  +-------+1  |
     | Server +-------+2  |
     +--------+       |   |
                      |   |
                      |   |
                      |   |
                      +---+
                     Catalyst
                     3500 XL

Port 1 and 2 of the Cisco catalyst 3500 XL have been
configured as an EtherChannel group.

When I finished all steps in "bonding.txt", the interface
configuration looks OK, but the aggregated link doesn't
work. I found the Cisco switch forwards only broadcast
frames to the aggregated link. (I tried to clear ARP cache
in the Cisco switch and then ping the Linux Server from
the switch. Linux Server did receive an arp request and
did send a reply to the switch and the switch did receive
the reply. But Linux Server didn't receive any following
icmp echo requests.)

My questions are:
1. Does anyone happen to know if Linux bonding driver can
    work with Cisco catalyst 3500 XL?
2. The document of catalyst 3500 XL says it supports
    EtherChannel. Except for configuring ports as an EtherChannel
    group, is there any other setting should be configured
    (like VLAN management) for link aggregation?
3. Is there any Linux networking option(like IP forwarding)
    should be turn on or off for NIC bonding?

Thanks in advance.

2. sort command

3. 10/100 card won't talk to 10/100 hub

4. resource allocation and deadlock avoidance

5. FS: 10/100 4 port switch and 4 10/100 Network Adapters

6. @ problem in Sco Unix 3.2

7. 3Com Etherlink XL 10/100 driver ????

8. Matrox G100/G200

9. 3Com Etherlink XL 10/100

10. CardBus 10/100 Ethernet choices?

11. ether: 3Com Fast EtherLink XL PCI-TX 10/100-BT ?

12. 3Com Fast Etherlink XL 10/100 PCI

13. Simple 10/100 router, What am i missing?