Campus core vs Data Center Core

[LynK]

Hey guys,

I am just reaching out to you all to talk a little bit about the differences between the two, and why Cisco segregates the two. Why does cisco have a 'campus core' and then a 'data-center' core? What are the differences (other than cost, but please do note). With today's networks (to me) it seems like there should no longe r be a separation between the two. We ran our campus and data center network at my old job across 7Ks. So why does cisco have the 6800 line, and then the 7/9k line? Why use different infrastructure for the two?

In my opinion I see no reason to separate the two. I am very interested in your opinions.

[deanwebb]

Our guys seem to have bought on to that, as well... we have the Nexus 7/9Ks in our datacenters and the 6800s in our branch sites that don't have a DC of their own.

[LynK]

exactly my point. It is really is stupid design by cisco. Data-center switches really are the traditional cores nowadays. I guess some people could divide up their network and keep 7ks only on data center and have campus infrastructure completely separate.

[NetworkGroover]

Uhhh... not sure if I'm missing something here.. but Internet/voice traffic differs greatly from server-to-server, storage traffic, etc.  Definitely different types of traffic flow in the two... stacking/virtual chassis acceptance, PoE, and wireless in the campus.. etc.

I don't work for Cisco, but I can agree that a DC is not the same as an enterprise campus network.

[LynK]

I know you dont, but who puts PoE on the core...? You still have voice/internet on your DC. I guess I see the difference if you are big enough to have complete silos for all of your infrastructure.

[NetworkGroover]

I know you dont, but who puts PoE on the core...? You still have voice/internet on your DC. I guess I see the difference if you are big enough to have complete silos for all of your infrastructure.

Wow - and that's what I get for briefly viewing without completely reading - my fault.

Regarding -specifically- the "core" - yes I don't see a difference.  In fact in my naive view, I'd look at the core as a transport between the DC and the campus - I don't see them needing separate, individual "cores".

EDIT - But... if you drink the kool-aide that means you spend more $$$?  I dunno.

[icecream-guy]

The data center is web hosting oriented, with virtual servers, web front ends, data back ends, storage and stuff like that.
The campus network is user oriented, and provides user services e.g. domain, web browsing, email and stuff like that.

Here
http://media.techtarget.com/searchNetworkingChannel/downloads/campus_and_data_center_network_design.pdf

[LynK]

@ristau


So you have your campus core 6800's and your data center core 9ks. How would you engineer the uplinks for these? Separate internet for both cores? Campus core connects to DC core then out?

[Nerm]

I think you are making a "one size fits all" assumption. Depending on design preference/environment/budget/etc it might make more sense to go converged or not. As with all design discussions I believe the answer is "it depends".

[LynK]

Nerm,

You are correct. There are a lot of variables that go into network architecture. I can understand for the big $$$ enterprises why they would have separate cores based upon function. That seems to really answer my question has to why cisco has both. However, it would be safe to assume most companies who have DC farms, or even collapsed cores would almost certainly go with DC cores over a campus core. Or even use 6800 at the distribution layer and user DC cores entirely.

[NetworkGroover]

Meh - just go Universal Spine and be done with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6djvarqkpks&feature=youtu.be

[LynK]

@aspiring,

You couldn't even get some decent actors who look decent to do you video......