switch reccomendations

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

Excuse me if this beyond the normal scope of this group.

But I'm after a 24 port 100baseT managed switch with some form of traffic
prioritisation, a couple of 1gig ports, SNMP and VLAN.

I don't usually buy this kind of stuff, I have a budget of £150 (240 ish
USD).

Is there a reccomended bit of kit that you guys would normally go for in
this sort of instance?

Thanks!
7 answers Last reply
More about switch reccomendations
  1. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

    In article <1frdks1yru95f$.dlg@dont-listen.net>,
    Adie <usenet@dont-listen.net> wrote:
    :Excuse me if this beyond the normal scope of this group.

    :But I'm after a 24 port 100baseT managed switch with some form of traffic
    :prioritisation, a couple of 1gig ports, SNMP and VLAN.

    :I don't usually buy this kind of stuff, I have a budget of £150 (240 ish
    :USD).

    That's a pretty tight budget for a 24 port managed switch, especially
    with the gig ports.


    :Is there a reccomended bit of kit that you guys would normally go for in
    :this sort of instance?

    Perhaps you could buy a Baystack 470-24T off Ebay.

    There are some very inexpensive 6 to 8 port gigabit unmanaged
    switches out there, but I doubt they would have vlans, snmp,
    or traffic prioritization, and 3 to 4 of them would still come out
    as more than 150 pounds (at least new.) I would not trust any
    important data to such switches without a thorough test with a
    packet generator.
    --
    Look out, there are llamas!
  2. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

    Walter Roberson wrote:
    > Adie <usenet@dont-listen.net> wrote:

    >:Is there a reccomended bit of kit that you guys would normally go for in
    >:this sort of instance?
    >
    > Perhaps you could buy a Baystack 470-24T off Ebay.
    >
    > There are some very inexpensive 6 to 8 port gigabit unmanaged
    > switches out there, but I doubt they would have vlans, snmp,
    > or traffic prioritization, and 3 to 4 of them would still come out
    > as more than 150 pounds (at least new.) I would not trust any
    > important data to such switches without a thorough test with a
    > packet generator.

    How about Netgear? No good?

    http://www.misco.co.uk/productinformation/45284/WW/Netgear_24x_10100_Smart_Switch_+_2_Gigabit_Ports/index.htm

    "NETGEAR's Smart Switch delivers built-in gigabit power at a very
    attractive price. With the utility of 24 10/100 Mbps ports and 2 copper
    Gigabit Ethernet ports, growing business networks can benefit from superior
    performance and keep up with expanding network needs. This high-performance
    switch connects to servers or a Gigabit-speed backbone for a non-stop
    10/100/1000-enabled network that can quickly deliver large multimedia,
    image, and video files. All 26 RJ-45 ports automatically negotiate to the
    highest speed and support Auto Uplink technology to make the right link. In
    addition, an intuitive, Web-browser interface offers simple switch
    management, making it a snap to monitor switch performance, configure
    ports, even set up port trunks, VLANs, and traffic prioritization. Shipped
    ready for use straight out of the box, it delivers switching that's easy to
    set up and use."

    Too cheap to be true?
  3. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

    In article <1514dr6hhsqc9$.dlg@dont-listen.net>,
    Adie <usenet@dont-listen.net> wrote:
    |>:Is there a reccomended bit of kit that you guys would normally go for in
    |>:this sort of instance?

    |How about Netgear? No good?

    |Too cheap to be true?

    http://www.pcmag.co.uk/products/hardware/1150184

    Netgear FS526T ... no SNMP management, which you had stated as
    a requirement. Also, only has two levels of priority, but that might
    be enough for you. The article says the switch has 8.8 Gb/s throughput,
    which implies that it is line rate across all of the ports:
    (24 x 100 + 2 x 1000) x 2 = 8800
    However, the information given there does not establish that it is
    able to handle 64 byte packets at full rate, only that it could
    handle full-sized packets at full rate.


    Generally speaking, I have seen a fair number of people expressing
    concerns about Netgear support. I have seen people express concerns
    about Netgear's return policy (check the details before buying!!).

    But if you are such on a limited budget, then you can't be overly fussy
    about support, or about bit error rates.
    --
    I've been working on a kernel
    All the livelong night.
    I've been working on a kernel
    And it still won't work quite right. -- J. Benson & J. Doll
  4. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

    In article <1514dr6hhsqc9$.dlg@dont-listen.net>,
    Adie <usenet@dont-listen.net> wrote:
    |>:Is there a reccomended bit of kit that you guys would normally go for in
    |>:this sort of instance?

    |How about Netgear? No good?

    |Too cheap to be true?

    http://www.pcmag.co.uk/products/hardware/1150184

    Netgear FS526T ... no SNMP management, which you had stated as
    a requirement. Also, only has two levels of priority, but that might
    be enough for you. The article says the switch has 8.8 Gb/s throughput,
    which implies that it is line rate across all of the ports:
    (24 x 100 + 2 x 1000) x 2 = 8800
    However, the information given there does not establish that it is
    able to handle 64 byte packets at full rate, only that it could
    handle full-sized packets at full rate.


    Generally speaking, I have seen a fair number of people expressing
    concerns about Netgear support. I have seen people express concerns
    about Netgear's return policy (check the details before buying!!).

    But if you are such on a limited budget, then you can't be overly fussy
    about support, or about bit error rates.


    --
    Whose posting was this .signature Google'd from?
  5. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

    Walter Roberson wrote:
    > In article <1514dr6hhsqc9$.dlg@dont-listen.net>,
    > Adie <usenet@dont-listen.net> wrote:
    >|>:Is there a reccomended bit of kit that you guys would normally go for in
    >|>:this sort of instance?
    >
    >|How about Netgear? No good?
    >
    >|Too cheap to be true?
    >
    > http://www.pcmag.co.uk/products/hardware/1150184
    >
    > Netgear FS526T ... no SNMP management, which you had stated as
    > a requirement. Also, only has two levels of priority, but that might
    > be enough for you. The article says the switch has 8.8 Gb/s throughput,
    > which implies that it is line rate across all of the ports:
    > (24 x 100 + 2 x 1000) x 2 = 8800
    > However, the information given there does not establish that it is
    > able to handle 64 byte packets at full rate, only that it could
    > handle full-sized packets at full rate.
    >
    > Generally speaking, I have seen a fair number of people expressing
    > concerns about Netgear support. I have seen people express concerns
    > about Netgear's return policy (check the details before buying!!).
    >
    > But if you are such on a limited budget, then you can't be overly fussy
    > about support, or about bit error rates.

    Yes, youre right.But I think it will do the job, I just need basic QoS for
    Voice and for an ERP app.

    Regarding SNMP, I should be able to use a MIB browser... I hope.

    Anyway, thanks for your input.
  6. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

    Adie wrote:

    >
    > Regarding SNMP, I should be able to use a MIB browser... I hope.
    >
    > Anyway, thanks for your input.

    Mib browser won't do much good for a switch that does not run SNMP at
    all. Zippo. Nilch. Nada.

    The FS526T does not speak snmp at all. You need an FSM726 for that. But
    that is out of your budget range.

    BTW, many of these lower cost managed switches have been known to have
    issues with multicast traffic.
  7. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet (More info?)

    T. Sean Weintz wrote:
    > Adie wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Regarding SNMP, I should be able to use a MIB browser... I hope.
    >>
    >> Anyway, thanks for your input.
    >
    > Mib browser won't do much good for a switch that does not run SNMP at
    > all. Zippo. Nilch. Nada.
    >
    > The FS526T does not speak snmp at all. You need an FSM726 for that. But
    > that is out of your budget range.

    Oh.... Bummer!

    > BTW, many of these lower cost managed switches have been known to have
    > issues with multicast traffic.

    I imagine it will have issues, hopefully I won't be the one to come accross
    them.
Ask a new question

Read More

Switch Ethernet Card Networking