Comments on: Cisco vs HP

By: dogbohn

dogbohn — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 13:37:26 +0000

We haven’t looked at HP for two or three years, but found the hardware just slightly less solid. The lifetime warranty is a selling point, and forced Cisco to give lifetime hardware warranty. We found the HP to have fewer features; the ultimate deal-breaker was the astonishingly minimal documentation on the web for HP.

We have been extremely disappointed that the Cisco switches do not have the capability of blocking IPV6 Router Advertisements at layer 2. This is a vital security feature as we move into IPV6. It would cost us more that $1500 per switch to upgrade to the L3 feature sets.

We found Juniper switches to be extremely well-made, full-featured, competitively priced. We have simply not had the time to learn JUNOS, which is totally different that cisco CLI. Since all Juniper switches are L3 enabled at no additional charge, one can block rogue V6 router advertisements.

By: erroneousgiant

erroneousgiant — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 14:04:56 +0000

Pricing is an issue but there is also the fact that the cisco gear often more complicated to do the same task.

While the embedded software of the HP switches works it is and is easy to use it is a little disjointed. Seems like several departments were asked to make a section for the switch software and didn’t talk to each other at all………..then bolted it together.

Still when it comes to switches and routers you really do get what you pay for.

By: jinteik

jinteik — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 13:30:01 +0000

at my side last time we actually use both and both is reliable but it goes down to 1 thing, pricing..