Cisco Ethernet Switches Reviews

We have a few different buildings within our premises, and we typically use the Cisco switches as the core backbone of our LAN. They are connected with fiber. We use them for our network to handle security and connectivity mainly.

Our core business is to sell beverages, so we're not your typical telecom or banking institution that would be a typical Cisco client.

The quality of service is one of the main reasons we use Cisco in our organization. It's quite high and very reliable. The switches also end up working for a long time, so there's less need to replace them as often as others. We have some switches in our company that have been running since 2006, for example. They are quite old, but they still work.

The security and the user interface are both good. Mainly, I end up using the command lines, but it's okay for me and the way I work. It's my preference, although it's not ideal for everyone.

There are quite a few features that Cisco offers, but for our business, it's not really necessary. If you are a telecom or a banking institution, you would probably find them to be quite useful.

The cost is very prohibitive both for us as well as other organizations. It's very expensive to buy Cisco switches. Among our colleagues, we find that we're not alone in thinking it's too high. Everyone's complaining about this. 

We have many switches that we've used sine 2006 and that are on the old OS, but we don't want to switch them out because the cost to do so would be quite high.

The graphical user interface could be a bit better. When we have new employees, we want them to onboard quickly and to be able to understand the switches. Having a better graphical interface would help us do that and help them understand the switches faster. While I prefer command line, many are not good with it or do not prefer that method.

We've been using the solution since 2006. It's been more than ten years, so we're quite well versed in the technology.

The solution is quite stable. Cisco is a brand that's known for its stability. Our switches have worked for well over 10 years in some cases, without fail.

We never really directly deal with Cisco, so I can't speak to how well they are from a customer service perspective.

We moved from a different type of switch originally. We found switching over was quite straightforward and didn't run into any difficulties. However, now our office and our infrastructure are much more complex, so there is a bit of a learning curve. Companies with complex infrastructures will find that there will be complexity in the setup. They'll have to sort through that when they get started.

Originally, when our offices were smaller and more straightforward, deployment didn't take to much time. We handled it over a weekend, from Friday to Sunday or Monday. However, at the time, we weren't yet doing segmentation traffic.

We had a consultant in Belgium who came in over the weekend to help us with the process when we originally set up the switches. Normally we work within our own team and have our own in-house workers that handle the configuration.

I don't handle the licensing aspect of the solution, so I can't speak to the exact pricing. However, I am aware it's one of the more expensive options on the market. The last time I bought a 24-port switch, which was a while ago, I paid about five or six thousand Euros. In this part of the world, that's quite expensive for us.

I did compare Cisco to Ubiquiti. I was doing this research for a friend who was trying to open a resort but had limited funding. He didn't want to deal with Cisco as he knew the pricing would be out of his budget, so he asked me to look into another option. He asked that I look at Ubiquiti. For him, Ubiquiti ended up being a good option and was quite affordable. I believe you can also use Ubiquiti at an enterprise level as well. 

We mainly work with Cisco ethernet switches at our organization.

Aside from the cost, the Cisco switches are quite stable and easy to use. 

If you have the money as an organization, I would highly recommend Cisco.

We are just a customer of Cisco. We don't have a special relationship with the company in any way shape or form.

I would rate the solution 8.5 out of ten. I would rate it higher, but the price is too high, in my opinion. It's quite good for me in terms of the usage I get out of it, but I find that I don't use other features that Cisco offers now.

We use this solution for our university campus network.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the stability.

The solution is simple to configure.

The layer-2 switching is very fast.

We would like to have the option of two power supplies on these switches. It is important for us because these switches are installed in our data center and critical departments. These units have to be available all of the time.

I would like to see this solution automatically store multiple versions of the configuration file. For example, Juniper switches will save forty versions of the configuration, while Cisco will only store one. If you want to keep more than one then you need to make it manually. If you need to restore it then you will have to use the saved file to do that manually, as well. In the large switches, they do keep one primary image and the backup image, which is good, but it is not like Juniper. I can roll back to any version within the last forty that have been committed. It's a very, very nice feature that I would like to see in Cisco equipment.

This is a very stable solution. You install it and then you don't have to touch it for many years.

At this level, the edge, we are not concerned with scalability. We will be able to update the edge using the new uplink port module if we need to.

The core switches are scalable. You can add another slot of forty-eight ports with 10-gigabit each. 

On the university campus, we have approximately thirty thousand users. These are not concurrent connections. We have more than twenty thousand students, about six thousand employees, and there are guests. I can say that more than twenty thousand connections may be active at one time.

We have about one thousand switches, and we have four people in charge of maintenance. They do the installation, repairs, and all of the other tasks in the data center. Three are technicians and one is a manager.

We work with our vendor, who in turns works with the Cisco support. There are times, however, when we need to get support directly from Cisco as well.

We are satisfied with both the local vendor support and support from Cisco. When we have problems, they put the effort into it until the problem is solved.

We had a problem with the structure of the switches in the core. We weren't sure what the problem was, but we were helped at every step of the process. Cisco was in contact with us every day until the problem was solved. We are very satisfied with the support.

I have experience with Juniper LAN switches, but that was with a previous company.

The university campus had bought Juniper switches about six years ago, but they are moving completely to Cisco equipment. Cisco is more expensive than Juniper by perhaps double. The price is higher because they are more stable.

We still have about one hundred Juniper switches out of our one thousand in total.

The initial setup of this solution is very simple.

You can copy the image to the switch using FTP and run a command to install it. The process is very simple and we always upgrade our switches without any problems.

This is an expensive solution, but you are paying for stability.

We evaluated Meraki switches but they were not suitable for the university campus.

We are looking forward to the 10-gigabit uplink port, which is an improvement that we have waited for. We expect to have this new module in one or two months.

Cisco has a family of Small Business Switches called SG. For example, the SG300 model. This is a cheaper model, and although they are missing some protocols, they are very good. Out of our one thousand switches, we have about one hundred SG models. The price of these is lower than Juniper switches.

I surely recommend this product, and the new Cisco line seems to be even stronger. There are improvements in terms of new modules and power supplies, and the price is not increasing.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I have been using the newest line of Cisco switches, the 9300 series, for two or three years.

We have two different models for deployment. One is the SDN deployment model, which has to do with Software-Defined Networking and is the more recent.

The other is the traditional three-tier, via core access aggregation layer five switches with an Independent Architecture Designed environment or access layer switches where you just use them to connect users to a specific service. It depends on what the nature of the work would be and the scope of work. But generally, most traditional networks have three layers. You have switches in a core of the network, switches in the distribution or aggregation layer, or switches in the access layer. This is the Three-tier module. If it is a collapsed core then it would be just simply the core and the access.

A primary use case is you could use it to connect mostly end-users and host systems. Systems could be servers, systems could be printers, systems could be telephones, and systems could be video conferencing equipment. That's one end use of it.

Another is the use in the data center. Ethernet Switches can be used in a data center out to provide connectivity, wired connectivity for servers, database systems, platforms, other platforms systems, and storage systems. With Ethernet you could have different speeds, so you can have Ethernet running at 1Gig, you can have Ethernet at 10Gig, you can have Ethernet at 40Gig, and you have Ethernet at 100Gig. So, depending on the nature of connectivity, you have that in the data center, you can have that also in an office environment. Then you go up to have it in industrial space, monitoring of industrial machines and control systems. So again, Ethernet is widely used.

There are several situations where these switches are used. Most times if they want to move off the main site, or they want to move locations, or they want to have temporary spaces, they can use a switch. Temporary means they may want to expand connectivity from their network to a small branch office that is temporary. Temporary means they're going to run something there for six months and then after that the business won't be there.

With switches, you can expand your network with a connection aside but you can extend your network to a particular area. You can also develop a campus network, campus meaning you may have one building in there and then the company acquires another building, and then it's easy to connect the two buildings together with Fiber and a switch if you have that available. 

There is also multi-tenancy, if you're in a building when you have multiple floors, it's easy to extend the premises from one floor to another floor using a switch as well.

In terms of projects, technical projects, they are several, I mean even down to connectivity to third parties inside the data center. For example, you may find out that you need to connect to BT or you need to connect to your telco provider. Switches will facilitate your ability to connect to a third party to allow communications between two separate environments that are managed differently.

I've done projects where the switches are also used for translation. For example, one part is using Fibre, the other part is using Ethernet, and the switch can be used to communicate between the two technologies. The switch will transform the physical characteristics of the link from Fiber to Ethernet.

There are two things about this solution that I find valuable. One valuable feature is that you can string a number of switches together, and the fact that there are various methods to connect them, such as by stacking. A stack means that they operate as one switch spot. You have multiple physical switches in the stack. For example, you could have one particular physical switch and you can have many of them all connected together as if they're one switch.

Another valuable feature is that the switches can operate at different layers of the networking environment. You can have switches that operate at layer three, you can have layer four switches and also obviously layer two, data layer, is their normal operation.

These switches are versatile. They can operate as a router, but they can also operate as a switch as well. The fact that you can run routing protocols on them, and you can also run data link protocols, means that they are quite versatile enough.

At the moment the switches that you have can't scale because they've got their control plane and data plane in the same device. The problem with that is you're limited to the number of switches you can string along because of limitations with VLAN. VLAN does have limitations, but with Software-Defined Networking there is no limitation. This is bringing about changes in the networking field that are long-needed. Ultimately, I would like to see all of the switches support SDN.

Switches should be made stackable, even if they are not of the same model. Now stacking is another technology that a lot of switches can benefit from, but not all switches are capable of stacking. There are some switches that are capable of stacking, but not all switches. As a rule, in my view, I feel stacking should work between different switches and at the moment it doesn't. For example, if you want to build a stack, all the switches in the stack have to be literally the same. So that another area of technology which could be different. You could stack switches, even if they're not exactly the same, but they have a way of operating such that they can work together. It would be nice because it means people don't have to throw away things just because they can't meet what they want.

I think this solution is very stable.

These switches have been around for a long time. Before that, all the technologies used couplers, which were called BNC connectors, network taps, all those things that existed. Couplers that existed before the arrival of Ethernet, they didn't last even two, three years, whereas Ethernet has been around for more than fifteen years.

Ethernet will continue to be around, and it's a very stable technology in terms of the operation. As well, Ethernet is the way forward, and it will still be around for another ten or fifteen years.

Ethernet does not scale very well because you've got distance limitations. Ethernet can only run for about one hundred meters or less, so you have to use Couplers. This distance limitation is why we use Fibre. Fibre optics is actually a better technology than Ethernet, but it's more expensive. Everything about it, the equipment, the nature of the way the Fibre cables are prepared, is a lot more expensive compared to Ethernet.

Ideally, everybody would like to run Fiber switches because it's a better technology that carries more bandwidth. The high price is due in part to the components. All the components that make Fibre work are expensive to produce. It can be relatively cheap for what we use it for but overall, it's way more expensive than Ethernet. If it wasn't for that then Fibre would have been the best solution. Ethernet, as it is right now, the cost price point for Ethernet is very good, so it won't be going anywhere fast soon. In terms of scalability, don't have limits. If you want to scale, you need to use Fiber to scale.

In terms of users, the organization right now has more than a thousand, and the previous one had approximately five thousand.

With respect to user roles, some are call center personnel, some platform systems guys, some are software developers, some project managers, some are marketing managers, some are sales managers, and some are professional services. Department-wise you have your legal, HR, and your finance department.

To my knowledge, our business is focused on doing work for clients so I expect that our usage of Ethernet Switches will be expanding.

The technical support for this solution is very good. They're very responsive.

I have also used the Meraki MX switches, but they are more like routers and used to support the wireless systems for Meraki.

With respect to the initial setup, the complexity depends on the topology. Most times they're not complicated. What's complicated is if you need to use them as a layer three switch, then you could have some complex configurations to do. However, if it's layer two, which is data layer connectivity only, then it's easy. If it's layer three then it's a little more challenging because you combine layer two and layer three and it could involve routing protocols. It's a lot more complex. 

Generally speaking, it depends on the manner in which you want to use the switch. Some deployments took maybe two weeks, some three days, some a month, and some even up to three months.

When it comes to my implementation strategy, first of all, you have to get the physical hardware into the data center or location where it needs to be. Make sure the right structured cabling was in place to connect this equipment so that it can work in that environment. Both from a power perspective and from a cabling perspective. I got to cable this switch to other systems and make sure that the right type of cabling is in place. Also, I have to make sure of the configurations that I'm going to use and get them organized upfront. In other words, I have the configurations I am going to put on a device and the software version. 

Another important thing is the software version. Make sure that the version is the appropriate one to put on there. Ensure that it doesn't have bugs or things, the type of configuration I want to put on there doesn't have bugs or anything that could impact the operation of those configurations.

After that is complete, I make sure that all of the connectors or transceivers that I've brought are the right type of transceivers for the systems. I'm able to connect them onto the network. Now that's just the physical connectivity.

There are other things you would do in implementation to test that the switch is working fine once it's operational. There are other tests that you conduct like Ping test, IP test, or whatever to show basic connectivity exists to that switch from the management perspective. You may also have tools, such as monitoring tools that you would use. You would also configure the monitoring tools to be able to recognize that particular device on the network and maybe things like memory, CPU, all the things to do with power, all these environmental conditions around that device are being monitored as well.

Then obviously you've got documentation as part of it. If you're putting a new set of equipment in there, the site probably has existing documentation that needs to be updated to reflect the fact that the typologies changed or you're introducing new equipment into that topology. In some cases, you've done this all upfront before you start the implementation. While in some cases, some companies, for the rush of time they want you to implement first and then do the documentation later. So again, it's still part of that strategy. Implementation wise, that's the approach you would go with in my opinion. Obviously there are different implementation approaches, and the stuff we're talking about here is just hardware.

I am a specialist, and in most cases, I handle the implementation and deployment.

The time I would use another person is if the data center was far away when it's not conceivable that I would travel to that location. I'd probably use somebody from the data center or use a data center engineer who would set up the hardware. He would put the hardware in the rack, the network cage, or rack where the equipment is going to be located. He would help me physically screw the equipment, take it out of the box, and connect it into the cage, and then I'd give him instructions on where to put cable or where to plug the various cables that come with the equipment. So once he's done that, I'm able to remotely connect to the device.

Those are remote working situations where you're not physically able to go to the site and do the work there. Then yes, I would work with other people sometimes and give them some instructions on what I want to have done at that location.

What is happening in the industry is that they are separating two things that traditionally held back the growth of switches, which is the control plane aspect of the switch from the data point. What you're finding is that the newer generation of switches, you can control them with a different device separately from the switch itself. In terms of the improvements, the improvements that are going on right now, Software Defined Networking creates the basis for you to have switches that can scale, and can scale very well.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The use case for Cisco Ethernet switches is foundational networking, which includes packet switching and routing within the organization's network. It facilitates communication between devices and networks, ensuring data packets are appropriately directed to their destinations.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are rugged, secure, and scalable. It provides smart devices and reliable switches.

There are instances where the commands you are familiar with might change or be replaced with newer syntax. They could provide details to know about the changed processes. Additionally, its pricing needs improvement.

It is a stable platform.

We can find references in the product's knowledge base to resolve the technical issues.

The initial setup process is straightforward. It involves understanding the user's configuration requirements. Setting up IP addresses or configuring security features like authentication can be accomplished within three to four minutes. Further, we configure security features like passwords, consoles, and connectivity to help prevent unauthorized access. It requires one technical executive for deployment and maintenance.

The product is worth the investment.

The product is expensive. However, it is cost-effective, considering its durability. There is only a need for licensing in case of specific security requirements or advanced configurations where we need to activate certain modules. We need to buy licenses for wireless controllers or VPNs. 

I recommend Cisco Ethernet Switches to others and rate it a ten out of ten.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are the product line I have the most experience with and have been my go-to solution for many years with mid to large organizations over the years. They are still top contenders for environments that need layer 3 functionality in a switch. They have a product line that covers the entire spectrum of switching technology from the high-end Nexus products through the traditional enterprise catalyst models and all the way down to the small business solutions. They seem to have the market covered with a solution to meet any IT shop's needs.

Cisco switches provide layer 3 functionality on the network taking that load off the security appliance and not requiring a router on the network. This prevents single points of failure for internal data routing and keeps internal routes off the security appliance workload. The CLI is the industry standard and most network professionals learn it and can use it.

The reliability of Cisco Ethernet Switches is amazingly impressive. Maybe I’m lucky but I have not experienced a Cisco Ethernet Switch fail unless caused by a power event such as lightning. I highly recommend connecting switches via fiber-optic connections due to the lack of electrical conductivity. I learned this the hard way when a building with the electrical systems not properly grounded caused a cascade of switch failures during a lightning storm.

The CLI is very valuable as it allows network professionals to work fast and customize the configuration however they need.

Cisco Ethernet Switches have great enterprise features like Cisco DNA Assurance. Cisco DNA Assurance features advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning. Cisco AI Network Analytics, a capability within Cisco DNA Assurance, allows easy management of all devices and services, prioritizes and resolves network issues, and ensures a better user experience across the network.

Also, appreciate the industrial line of switches for SCADA or other environments where switches are placed in unconditioned space and the temperatures fluctuate a lot during the seasons.                        

The typical areas of concern for Cisco Ethernet Switches are not technical but cost including support costs. I’ve never liked the fact that end users cannot download security patches without a support contract. I’ve had trouble getting approval to renew Cisco support contracts due to the cost.

The additional charges for the DNA capabilities of the switches further prices the switches are out of contention for a lot of IT shops. I understand the development of this technology is expensive but costs are sometimes borderline ridiculous.

I have 28 years of experience with Cisco switches.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are some of the most rock-solid hardware I’ve had the pleasure of using.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are extremely scalable and have the broadest line of solutions in the market.

Cisco's technical support has deteriorated over the years. They have call centers all over the world and sometimes the techs experience levels seem to vary. This seems to be the industry standard though in my experience.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches my entire career. I really like them but they are not always cost-effective.

If you know the CLI interface the setup is straightforward. If not you are in for a bumpy ride.

We deploy with in-house talent.

ROI is longer than other solutions in the enterprise space but comparable in the small business area of Cisco’s product lines.

Find a Cisco partner that has a lot of volume and pressure them for a better price. There is a lot of markup on the higher end devices. Plan for support contract expenses for the life of the device. Also check the EOL details prior to purchase so you don’t purchase an older device that will not get the years of software updates and security patches you need. EOL dates are starting to decrease in length.

We compared it to Meraki if cloud management would be helpful. Cisco has more recently started to offer Meraki dashboard management for traditional Cisco switches.

You will not be disappointed with a Cisco solution from a technical perspective. Learn the OS via CLI and you will always have job security too.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches in government offices that are in multiple locations.

We have experienced some issues with Cisco SG350 switches. We have not been able to use this switch at normal temperatures as it automatically reboots.

I've been working with Cisco Ethernet Switches for 10 years.

I would rate the stability at ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution, and we have more than 35 customers who use it.

Technical support staff usually get back to us in 30 minutes to four hours. It took them 24 hours to respond only once. Therefore, I would rate technical support at ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. For the deployment and maintenance, we have seven technical and non-technical staff members.

The price is very high though it is priced right for the level of quality.

I would recommend Cisco Ethernet Switches and rate it at ten on a scale from one to ten. However, it may not be as available in certain countries such as India.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches in our data center.

The most valuable feature is that we create a network as a villain. For some time, we use a port channel and sometimes, the Spanning Tree Protocol for requests. We search for the user's Cisco Internet switches for small packets.

The technical support has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for six years.

The Cisco Ethernet Switches are very stable and a leader in the market.

The solution is scalable and we have the ability to upgrade our appliances without impacting our services.

The Cisco technical support is good but when compared to other products such as McAfee and Palo Alto they have room for improvement.

For Cisco Catalyst switches, the initial setup was usually automated for large-scale deployments such as Azure, which worked well. However, for newer technologies such as Cisco ACI, the initial setup can be challenging. Once the primary phase is completed, however, the efficiency of the operation requires less support.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the Cisco 9200 and 2960 Ethernet Switches to connect our devices to the network.

Remote access is a valuable feature.

Cisco can improve its supply chain. Currently, we have to wait up to eight months for a switch.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We have 1,000 people using the solution.

The technical support is quick to respond.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy to deploy.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.