NPE-G2 vs. Sup720-3BXL

Crooks, Sam Sam.Crooks at experian.com
Fri May 15 13:41:16 CDT 2009


You may also take a look at the Cisco ASR1000 line... Supposedly a
middle step between 7200 and 7600 router sizing..

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arie Vayner [mailto:arievayner at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 1:34 PM
> To: David Storandt
> Cc: NANOG list
> Subject: Re: NPE-G2 vs. Sup720-3BXL
> 
> David,
> 
> My 1st advice would be to look also at the other 
> features/capabilities you require, and not just at "feeds and speeds".
> 
> Some examples for functionality could be:
> - QOS
> - NetFlow
> - DDoS resistance
> 
> In general the 6500 and the 12000 are hardware based 
> platforms, with the 12000 being more distributed in nature, 
> using linecard resources for data plane (6500 does it too if 
> you have DFC installed). 7200 is a CPU/software based 
> platform, so the same processor does packet forwarding and 
> control plane processing.
> 
> The 6500 (depends on specific module selection) is more 
> restricted with QOS and NetFlow functionality as it is 
> designed to do very fast forwarding at a relativly cheaper price.
> The 12000 has everything implemented in hardware, and depends 
> on the engine types (don't use anything other than Eng 3 or 
> 5) has all the support you may dream of for things like QOS 
> and other features.
> The 7200 is a software based router, which means that it 
> support any feature you may ever dream of, but the 
> scalability decreases as you turn them on.
> 
> Another option you should consider seriously should be the 
> ASR1000 router, which is a newer platform and has a new 
> architecture. All its features are based on hardware support, 
> and it could actually prove the best choice for what you need.
> The ASR1002 comes with 4 integrated 1GE ports, which could be 
> all that you would ever need (but it has quite a few 
> extension slots left).
> 
> Arie
> 
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 6:07 PM, David Storandt 
> <dstorandt at teljet.com>wrote:
> 
> > We're stuck in an engineering pickle, so some experience from this 
> > crew would be useful in tie-breaking...
> >
> > We operate a business-grade FTTx ISP with ~75 customers and 
> 800Mbps of 
> > Internet traffic, currently using 6509/Sup2s for core 
> routing and port 
> > aggregation. The MSFC2s are under stress from 3x full route feeds, 
> > pared down to 85% to fit the TCAM tables. One system has a FlexWAN 
> > with an OC3 card and it's crushing the CPU on the MSFC2. 
> System tuning 
> > (stable IOS and esp. disabling SPD) helped a lot but still doesn't 
> > have the power to pull through. Hardware upgrades are needed...
> >
> > We need true full routes and more CPU horsepower for crunching BGP
> > (+12 smaller peers + ISIS). OC3 interfaces are going to be 
> mandatory, 
> > one each at two locations. Oh yeah, we're still a larger startup 
> > without endless pockets. Power, rack space, and SmartNet are not 
> > concerns at any location (on-site cold spares). We may need an 
> > upstream OC12 in the future but that's a ways out and not a concern 
> > here.
> >
> > Our engineering team has settled on three $20k/node options:
> > - Sup720-3BXLs with PS and fan upgrades
> > - Sup2s as switches + ISIS + statics and no BGP, push BGP 
> edge routing 
> > off to NPE-G2s across a 2-3Gbps port-channel
> > - Sup2s as switches + ISIS + statics and no BGP, push BGP 
> edge routing 
> > off to a 12008 with E3 engines across a 2-3Gbps port-channel.
> >
> > Ideas and constructive opinions welcome, especially software and 
> > stability-related.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > -Dave
> >
> >
> 




More information about the NANOG mailing list