I am not familiar with the power stacking but you can bet your arse
that you should have a "PS required +1" number ob PSUs
in the stack.  Your 9 switches may be able run off three PSUs but if
one blows up you all of a sudden have a down stack.  I'd be adding the
extra one all the time.  Unless I have this completely wrong ;)

Cheers,
Matt

CCIE #22386
CCSI #31207


On 10 July 2010 08:34, Di Bias, Steve <[email protected]> wrote:
> Right so if you had 9 switches in your stack and decided to utilize 
> StackPower as well you would end up with 3 StackPower stacks within you 
> StackWise stack.
>
> Phew, that's a lot of stacks in this email!
>
> Steve Di Bias
> Network Engineer - Information Systems
> Valley Health System - Las Vegas
> Office - 702- 369-7594
> Cell - 702-241-1801
> [email protected]
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Beynon [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 3:10 PM
> To: Di Bias, Steve
> Cc: Matt Hill; Tyson Scott; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] OT: Cisco Catalyst 3750-X series??
>
> True, but the stack wise and stack power are independant, so you could
> still stack all 9 switches with stack wise whilst powering them as
> three stacks.
>
> Or atleast that is what we are told.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 8 Jul 2010, at 15:53, "Di Bias, Steve" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> One other caveat is that StackPower supports up to four switches
>> only, whereas the StackWise technology supports up to nine devices
>> per stack.  So, there could be scenarios where you could have two
>> StackPower stacks within the same StackWise group of switches,
>> assuming you have more than 4 in an IDF.
>>
>> Luckily for me most of the IDF's have between 2 and 3 48 port
>> switches, but good info incase others are considering the x series
>>
>> Steve Di Bias
>> Network Engineer - Information Systems
>> Valley Health System - Las Vegas
>> Office - 702- 369-7594
>> Cell - 702-241-1801
>> [email protected]
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Matt Hill [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 4:18 PM
>> To: Tyson Scott
>> Cc: Di Bias, Steve; Bill; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] OT: Cisco Catalyst 3750-X series??
>>
>> I agree with the 3750X as it appears "on paper".
>>
>> As always with a v1.0 Caveat Emptor...  Of course this wont matter
>> when in 3 months when the IOS gets its first .1 release :)
>>
>> If it is power redundancy you are after then your 4500s certainly give
>> you that.  Then again you say you are using 3 x switches in each
>> stack.  That means you would have a whole 4506 taking up all those RU
>> (with two empty slots and no no failed supervisor redundancy) when
>> your 3x3750X will be taking up far less real estate!  With
>> "supervisor" (stack master) redundancy too...
>>
>> My cursory pros & cons list leans me towards 3750X.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Matt
>>
>> CCIE #22386
>> CCSI #31207
>>
>>
>> On 8 July 2010 07:09, Tyson Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Fixed Chassis is always cheaper and the specs on the 3750X switches
>>> is very
>>> good.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tyson Scott - CCIE #13513 R&S, Security, and SP
>>>
>>> Managing Partner / Sr. Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
>>>
>>> Mailto: [email protected]
>>>
>>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444, ext. 208
>>>
>>> Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat
>>>
>>> eFax: +1.810.454.0130
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on
>>> Demand,
>>> Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the
>>> Cisco
>>> CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with
>>> training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia
>>> and
>>> Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at
>>> www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at www.ipexpert.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: [email protected]
>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Di Bias,
>>> Steve
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 5:04 PM
>>> To: Bill; [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] OT: Cisco Catalyst 3750-X series??
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From what I can tell it supports IEEE 802.3af PoE+. Depending upon
>>> the
>>> wattage of the power supplies you buy you can actually do up to 30W
>>> of power
>>> per port!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Stev
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> From: Bill [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 1:53 PM
>>> To: Di Bias, Steve; [email protected]
>>> Subject: RE: [OSL | CCIE_RS] OT: Cisco Catalyst 3750-X series??
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do the new 3750-X support Enhanced POE for the new devices? That
>>> was a key
>>> feature that the 4500's supported.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> From: [email protected]
>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Di Bias,
>>> Steve
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 3:46 PM
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] OT: Cisco Catalyst 3750-X series??
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hey everyone,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I was considering replacing some of our 3750 stacks with 4506-E's
>>> but our
>>> Cisco rep suggested we take a look at the *new* 3750-X series
>>> instead.  I'm
>>> really interested in the new StackPower capabilities which gives
>>> you power
>>> redundancy within the stack. Also the power supplies are modular
>>> with two
>>> slots on each chassis. The uplink modules are also modular allowing
>>> for 2
>>> 10gbE or 4 10GbE uplink ports.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Has anyone seen these things in action yet? Any recommendations as to
>>> staying with the 3750-X series or moving to a single 4506 chassis
>>> for IDF's
>>> that have 3 or more switches in the stack? Thanks in advance!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Steve Di Bias
>>>
>>> Network Engineer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> UHS Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
>>> attachments,
>>> is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
>>> confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,
>>> use,
>>> disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited, and
>>> may be
>>> punishable by law. If this was sent to you in error, please notify
>>> the
>>> sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
>>> message.
>>>
>>>
>>> UHS Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
>>> attachments,
>>> is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
>>> confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,
>>> use,
>>> disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited, and
>>> may be
>>> punishable by law. If this was sent to you in error, please notify
>>> the
>>> sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
>>> message.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
>>> please
>>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> UHS Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any
>> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and
>> may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any
>> unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this
>> information is prohibited.  If this was sent to you in error, please
>> notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
>> original message.
>> _______________________________________________
>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
>> please visit www.ipexpert.com
>
>
> UHS Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, 
> is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may contain 
> confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use, 
> disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited.  If this was 
> sent to you in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy 
> all copies of the original message.
>
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to