• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Layer 3 Switch vs. Router

F

feverlax

Limp Gawd
2FA
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
350
What are the benefits of using a Layer 3 switch as opposed to a router for distributing traffic? Basically the building I work in has a fiber line coming in which then gets connected to a Level 3 switch (NetVanta 1534) which is then connected to all the ethernet ports and what not. Why would they choose to use this device as opposed to a router? Or just a regular Layer 2 switch?

Thanks!
 
You need to route between vlans, to use a router to do this you will be limited by the routers link speed, a layer 2 switch can't route so a layer 3 switch in some cases is the best option.

I assume this is some kind of LAN extensions and not a leased internet line.
 
Last edited:
Are you even sure they use the Layer 3 features?
Most (all?) manged switches are Layer 3, therefore if you want a managed switch, you're probably going to have a Layer 3 device.

We have all managed procurve l3 switches, but don't use a single routing service on any of them.
 
I'm not entirely sure what features they are using. I do know that they are upgrading the switches in place now to the NetVanta 1534 Layer 3 "lite" switches to allow them to do MAC address filtering, block rogue DHCP devices and provide remote management and other security features. I was mostly just wondering if they were really cost efficient for our needs
 
Right now, L3 switches from the "mainline brands" (HP/Dell/Cisco) are not really cost efficient. Using L2 switches + routers is usually less costly. Lately, companies like Adtran and Allied Telesis have been selling switches with L3 features that aren't terribly expensive. But there is usually a question of whether people "trust" those switches.
 
Most layer 3 switches will do basic routing. They can do static routes, maybe some simple routing with RIP. Some can do access lists and other router type functions.

A true router is going to do a lot more. Larger, more complex access lists, support for more routing protocols, like EIGRP, BGP, OSPF.

If you're routing between 2 internal subnets, probably a basic layer 3 switch is fine. Larger networks need bigger switches. If you're connecting to an ISP and running BGP, you'll want a true router.

Routers also support more connection types. A switch will do Ethernet, and if you buy an expensive enough switch, maybe ATM, either PVCs or (rarely) LANE.

A router will do connections via T-1, T3, DSL, serial, ethernet, ATM, etc... You can usually use a router for VPN connections, NAT, etc...
 
I think you left out the one "big problem" for L3 switches - they can't usually do NAT. I think that's the main reason most people still need a router even if they have an L3 switch.
 
I've never touched a Cisco 6500 but do they do NAT?

From the top of my head I recall a 3750 being able to do BGP, EIGRP, ACLs and possibly Tunnels (don't quote me on the last two).

I do agree on the different media types. Also, the cost of routers (depending on the model) could be cheaper than a Layer 3 switch.
 
I've never touched a Cisco 6500 but do they do NAT?
Click to expand...
Yes, but that's the only cisco switch that can do NAT. Furthermore, if you can afford a 6500, you won't be worried about whether you need a router or not =)
 
In my org we only use 3800s, CAT 3750s, CAT 4500s, 7600s, and ASRs. What's the average price range on a 6500, CSR, 7000 and XSRs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top