The NX-OS is stripped down by 50% and is supposed to be a lot less buggy. It uses the T2 ASIC for the "basic" stuff and uses Cisco's ALE (Application leaf engine) for the more complex features. I would also deploy leaf/spine L3 topology and use VXLAN/EVPN if the fabric needs to support L2, otherwise consider deploying L3 to the host.We basically did it last month - switched our two cores from Cisco to Arista. Their parser is instantly recognisable if you've ever used IOS. Compare verified reviews from the IT community of Arista Networks vs. Cisco in Data Center Networking. Cisco, on the other hand, offers a wide range of routing platforms, ranging from single RU devices made for branch offices to full-rack, modular devices. Arista's pricing is weird, sometimes the newer models end up being cheaper.I'd encourage you to get something capable of both 25G and 100G connections; 40G isn't going to be a cost effective or common connection in the future.Cumulus Linux has a robust networking built on top Linux. If you have a shit ton of multicast sources/groups and combine that with multicast boundast boundaries on the original 7124S/24SX/48X/48SX you will start getting some missing mroutes.Cisco is doing a lot more merchant silicon, with software on top if you want it (ACI).It's merchant + some specific asics to run the ACI features, as far as I understand. It's also full of bugs. More recently I've started using some of the extensibility (custom SNMP extensions) which is great (technically they implemented some open source netsnmp modules into the cli, but still very useful for scripters) if you want to start digging into sysdb (database that bridges the Fedora Linux OS with the fulcrum/broadcom ASICs). Depending on your needs you may run into issues with address table scales. I'm not clear on your post. Granted I didn't use Cisco for my routing gear either but the arista's did the switching job and just pushed packets like it's no ones business.From a software point of view, EOS is based on Linux (Fedora install iirc). It's a very dated platform. level 2. Qty 2 for whichever is the winner.It's got the same site-to-site capabilities as the first switch I mentioned, but only 1/10G on the bulk of it's ports (no 25G ports on most ports.).
Although Arista offers a routing solution in the form of a software-based system, it doesn’t offer routing hardware. I looked through their product lineup just now and nothing jumped out at me as supporting PoE.The C9500-40X has been superseded by the C9500-48Y4C, which is a significantly better platform.start with 10G distribution, 40G site-to-site (or 25G site to site)Good info, thanks! I'm ex-Cisco TAC, and Arista TAC is absolutely the level of support from a vendor I expect.
This is technically mostly a Fulcrum issue though, but they used the fastest ASIC available at the time like everyone else.Hardware wise, Arista buy their ASICs, and spend the engineering time implementing features on top of the hardware.The biggest difference is the level of support - when wierd shit happens, with Cisco you get TAC which takes forever or is simply useless. They are looking more and more like a good investment.Platform wise, EOS is a single binary.The only place Arista can be lacking is TCAM (basically the memory for the ASICs). Arista, on the other hand, only buys commodity silicon.
Boeing Dreamlifter Registrations, Stink And The Incredible Super-galactic Jawbreaker, Best Ambiance Restaurants Dc, Nathan Anderson Age All About The Washington, How Old Was Jennifer Grey When She Died, How To Make Crochet Earrings Stiff, Tribeca Apartments Stl, Is Tyed A Word,