Hardware for 50Mbs BGP feed.WAS Rate Limiting on Cisco Router

Fri Jul 9 17:35:52 UTC 2010

I think a 7200VXR with NPE-G1 that has 1Gb of ram would work just fine
for you.  We are running a very similar setup, passing about 70Mbs, full
BGP routes, 2 providers and ACLs, only seeing about 20% usage on the CPU
at peak times.

---- ---- ---- ----
Chris Gotstein, Network Engineer, U.P. Logon/Computer Connection U.P.
http://uplogon.com | +1 906 774 4847 | chris at uplogon.com

On 7/9/2010 11:43 AM, Dylan Ebner wrote:
> Yesterday we took possession of a free 50Mb connection upgrade from one of our ISPs. The previous connection was 30Mbps with a partial route table via BGP. Other than BGP, the only other complex functions the router performs is access listing the CRYMU Team Bogon table and traffic shaping. We terminate this into a 2811 running 12.4 with 512MB of memory. When the Access lists were applied we peaked the connection at 39Mbps and when the access list was removed we peaked at 43.5Mbps. The CPU was pegged at 65% with the acl and 50% without. Given the recent discussion about 80Mbps and a 7200, what would members here recommend for a 50Mb connection that we expect to grow to 100Mb in the next 18 months. We are also planning on adding netflow collection in the next year as well.
> 
> We were think of upgrading to a 3900 series, but it sounds like maybe we should be thinking bigger?
> 
> Also, how do members determine if their routers are overloaded. Besides looking at memory and CPU usage are their other statistics they look at? Are their third party tools that provide some insight into the routers condition?
> 
> 
> 
> Dylan Ebner
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Bryant [mailto:alan at gtekcommunications.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 8:33 PM
> To: gordslater at ieee.org
> Cc: Murphy, Jay, DOH; nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Rate Limiting on Cisco Router
> 
> So you guys would not recommend the traffic shaping route on a 7206
> with a NPE-G1? Is it the processor or memory that would not be able to
> handle it?
> 
> I don't necessarily plan on doing anything other than limiting it at
> 80Mbps or whatever it is that we are capping ourselves at at the time.
> 
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 7:13 PM, gordon b slater <gordslater at ieee.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 18:54 -0500, Jack Bates wrote:
>>> underpowered router or poor code
>>
>> Agreed. So which is it?  :)
>>
>> To be fair, some IOS versions were better than others at it in my
>> limited experience of that chassis.
>>
>> Gord
>> --
>> I hold you XAP
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 