Hands on with Sony's new X-series Walkman
Sony is refreshing its Walkman line with new flagship models that pack noise cancelling, a bright touchscreen display, mobile TV, and the ability to surf...
From a convicted terminology abuserDave, as a red-handed “terminology-abusing marketer”, I’d like to offer up a brief explanation of the term “L3 switching” to help clarify what the term means, where it came from, and why it has become a bit of an anachronism in today’s technology world. It’s an interesting example of how technical terms evolve and change over time. Networking professionals know that network “switching” (as a technology) means forwarding decisions are made using layer 2 information (the MAC address). The term “routing” means those decisions are made using layer 3 information (the IP address). Way back in the early days of networking (6 or 7 years ago!), “routers” were complex, expensive, and relatively slow products that used software running on general-purpose processors to move traffic. Switches, which made simpler forwarding decisions based on the MAC address, were generally faster and less expensive. As a result, “switches” (the products) rapidly gained popularity in Enterprise networks. “Layer 3 switching” was born from the insight that once the initial “routing” decision was made, the switch’s MAC address table could be programmed with the source MAC/destination MAC address pair for faster “switched” forwarding of subsequent traffic. So the slower “routing” technology established the initial path and “switching” moved subsequent traffic. Today, the taxonomy for networking has evolved. We now reserve the word “router” for big products that support intra-domain routing protocols like BGP or for small devices (think SOHO or branch) that support LAN/WAN interfaces and provide network address translation services. We use the term “switch” primarily to describe products that support only Ethernet media and inter-domain routing protocols like OSPF. Nearly all Enterprise-grade switch products can use layer 3 information to make forwarding decisions. So if you hear a vendor refer to an “L3 switch,” that means the product probably has only Ethernet interfaces and it is capable of making forwarding decisions using IP information. An “L2 switch” meets the more classic definition of a switch because it is not typically capable of making forwarding decisions using L3 information. To complicate matters, many advanced L2 switches ARE capable of making access control decisions (not forwarding decisions) using L3 information. That’s where the divergence in terminology enters the picture. “Switching” and “routing” as technologies are still what we learned in school, but “switches” and “routers” as product categories have evolved – not necessarily due to terminology abuse (well, okay, maybe :)), but due to the fact that “routing” technologies have crept into the “switch” product category. Scott Lucas Extreme Networks
RE: Review: 10Gig Ethernet access switch shootoutBy Anonymous on March 24, 2008, 11:38 amIt's incredible to me that you gave the top spot to Cisco when it was TWO TIMES the price of the nearest competitor! As a matter of fact you only mention it in passing, as if it is totally irrelevant. It does not appear in the "Cons" column for the Cisco! The overall scores among the top players were so close, an unbiased reviewer would have come out and said, "You should be fired if you waste your company's money on the Cisco switch". Period. Imagine an automotive magazine's shootout between a Ford, Chevy and Chrysler; where the reviewer finds that the cars are basically identical. The Ford wins by a hair but costs TWICE the price of the other cars. Can you imagine a single LEGIT automotive magazine that wouldn't totally trash the Ford for their pricing and highly recommend that the consumer avoid it?
10gigBy clarkntl on November 13, 2009, 2:39 amThe best things in life are nearest: Breath in your nostrils, light in your eyes, flowers at your feet, duties at your hand, the path of right just before you. Then do not grasp at the stars, but do life's plain, common work as it comes, certain that daily duties and daily bread are the sweetest things in life.
asdfasdBy Anonymous on October 16, 2009, 2:45 am I never buy from outlet, thereplica watches replica watch omega watches price is expensive and I always bought online. Rolex DateJust Woman's Watch-C1521 Replica Cheap For Sale Rolex DateJust Woman's Watch-C1523 Replica Cheap For Sale Rolex DateJust Woman's Watch-C1525 Replica Cheap For Sale Rolex DateJust Man's Watch-C1524 Replica Cheap For Sale Rolex DateJust Man's Watch-C1526 Replica Cheap For Sale Rolex DateJust Man's Watch-C1528 Replica Cheap For Sale Rolex DateJust Man's Watch-C1536 Replica Cheap For Sale
RE: Review: 10Gig Ethernet access switch shootoutBy Anonymous on April 15, 2008, 4:27 pmI've used both Extreme and Cisco and since they both move packets equally well I have to base my decision on ease of configuration and Cisco blows Extreme away. Extreme's configuration is one big flat-file and there's no pipe or grep functionality. Something Cisco does so simple like STP configuration is a chore in XOS and don't even get me started on EAPS omg what a joke, can you say Layer 2 loop.
IT Professionals or "Religious Zealots"?By david.oberry on March 30, 2008, 2:24 amOh well..here goes..I am not gonna make friends with this one but I am not out to win any popularity contests. Forgive me in advance if any of this comes across as chiding or self-righteous because that is certainly not my intent. None of us are perfect (least of all me) and while I am in a different place at this point in time, I have been on that white-hot "Cisco is the Devil" wagon a few times in my career. What I learned though is that level of angst can be almost debilitating and you seldom make good decisions when you are blinded to either side of a discussion. To set the proper context for my comments: I have no remaining organization-owned Cisco products (the exception to me being able to say "no remaining" is one small PIX box over which I have no control) currently left in my enterprise at this point in time. With that said, if you read what went down Newman and his folks did a clear test based on their methodology. They published as such. They are answering all of the questions, even the ones posed in a completely asinine manner. You have anon posters taking potshots and the dude is still trying to answer even those questions in a reasonable manner. For one thing, most times hyper-critical anonymous posting in a situation like this is weak. Instead, show yourself and defend what you are saying. That is the only way to have real credibility. Period. Again, let me be clear here... I do not always agree with the way Cisco has done and continues to do business in some instances. I do not agree with how they fail to participate in standards until it behooves them to do so creating a possibly harmful environment for users at this point and at times stifling innovation. I also realize that Cisco seems to fail to understand that it holds a position in the industry that needs to transcend its old monopolistic control type mentality based on the increasingly vulnerable interconnected nature of the digital ecosystem in which we now reside. Having said all of the above, that is not what was tested here. Cisco is not going away and when people post like some did here it not only gives the establishment something to smirk about but it takes away from the credibility of people that actually take other paths for valid reasons. It can even hurt the argument for alternatives far more than it helps in many situations. What we need to do as end-users is come together and realize that we have to take a much stronger leadership position in this industry. Instead of letting companies tell us where to go and what to do, we need to be telling them what paths to go down to give us the tools to do our jobs. The new world we live in as far as security nearly demands that change and yet some would rather hold their breath, scream, and pitch a tantrum rather than reasonably come to the table as a consolidated group to address the concerns we have right now about the role Cisco currently plays. In this set of tests, Cisco beat ProCurve by a small margin. The prices were published and ProCurve's list was significantly below Cisco. The comments regarding the cost aspect were answered by Newman. I will go further than he did and say list price is a joke and anyone in the industry that does not realize that fact should refrain from posting. Consider also other vendors have products that did a bit worse in this test and yet are valid for the business cases of their customers. Foundry and Extreme barely missed Cisco and ProCurve as it is and if you break it down, what they lagged on might not even necessarily pertain when you begin looking at things like virtualization, iSCSI, etc. At the same time, Juniper and a few others will be competing hard in this market going forward and Newman acknowledged as such and said he and his folks would look at other product later as it becomes available. I simply do not see him hiding here. Even his explanation on the line-rate thing was solid and not evasive. He and his people also seem to detest the marketing FUD as much as the rest of us. I am not sure folks can ask for more than this because to do so almost precludes any testing ever being done for fear of "not being fair". I know I would not like to go back to those days because less knowledge is seldom a good thing in our profession. Take what you see here and do your own exploration, run your own tests, ask your own questions of the various vendors. Use it as a starting and reference point and not as an end all be all answer. Our roles are as stewards and leaders here, not tantrum pitching toddlers. If you are not able to make the case for whatever product you choose based on a test conducted by Network World then I submit you have bigger issues. Jeez..making me even come close to defending Cisco is just not right! On the other hand, defending a guy that I have never met or spoke with that is only trying to do a job to the best of his ability is a clear and easy choice each and every time. It cannot be easy to draw this particular task understanding the fervency on both sides. Keep that in mind as you anonymously wail away on him. Regards, David
Cisco Pricing???By Anonymous on March 28, 2008, 8:51 amThe analogy between Ford, Chevy and Chrysler would have some merit if everyone went in and paid list price which would be stupid. There is no way to include pricing in these test because list prices mean nothing, we currently have a contract with Cisco that gives us a 52% discount off list and includes a years of Smartnet which puts them directly inline with most other vendors around here.
TreyBy Anonymous on September 1, 2009, 11:02 pmTrey....you have no clue what you are talking about. You are a f-tard. Jed
Re: Cisco Pricing???By Anonymous on March 28, 2008, 10:51 amI couldn't agree more, Cisco gives much larger discounts than the rest. We purchase Juniper, Force10, F5, blucoat and Cisco just to name a few and Cisco by far has the highest discount rate. I guess if you work in the SMB market where you may not get very high discounts then this may be a big deal, but for anyone in the enterprise there is no excuse to go off and purchase a lack luster product.
I am sorry, but when someone writes an article about switchingBy Anonymous on March 25, 2008, 4:57 pmI am sorry, but when someone writes an article about switching technologies and then refers to a switch as a device that "can route IPV6 packets" I have a tendency to believe the author does not know what he is talking about. While 802.1x and IPV6 support may be desirable for some customers, does the added cost justify these features? In addition, how many people need DOS protection at the switch level or closer to the core?
Re: I am sorry ...By david_newman on March 25, 2008, 4:58 pmHey, I agree with you -- I too think the term "L3 switching" is really stupid. I just test the features on the boxes vendors send me. Unfortunately I can't stop marketeers from abusing terminology. As for DOS protection, I believe it is a useful feature on every element in the network, both for the data plane (keep the pipes free) and for the control plane (keep the device visible). Regards, David Newman Network Test ps. A plea, probably futile: Please don't post anonymously. Though some anonymous posts are pretty obviously vendor trolls, it's useful to know who you are in addition to what you have to say.