NPE-G2 vs. Sup720-3BXL
Crooks, Sam
Sam.Crooks at experian.com
Fri May 15 18:41:16 UTC 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