perf #s for GRF vs 7500 Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP S witch?

Paul Peterson paulp at
Wed Aug 27 08:40:42 UTC 1997

Has anyone compared the figures or have any feelings regarding the Bay
Networks BCN ??

We are considering one over a Cisco 7513/RSP4 or a GRF.

Bay claims to hold the entire Internet routing table in just 4-6MB RAM
per BGP peer (I assume this is after convergence). They say that the
method in which they do this is proprietary. I am just wondering if it
is possible.....


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Craig A. Huegen [SMTP:c-huegen at]
> Sent:	Tuesday, August 26, 1997 9:00 PM
> To:	joseph j. kim
> Cc:	Joe  Shaw; nanog at
> Subject:	Re: perf #s for GRF vs 7500 Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's
> GRF IP Switch?
> On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, joseph j. kim wrote:
> ==>So, who's numbers should we believe or feel are more appropriate to
> real
> ==>world situations?
> ==>
> ==>> Comparing GateD to IOS becomes more of a religious preference
> than
> ==>> anything else.  I'm content knowing both, truth be told.
> ==>> 
> ==>> > maybe someone can post some performance numbers.
> Tolly's report didn't use CEF/FIB switching, and used classical
> (centralized) switching.  Ascend paid Tolly for the test anyway--the
> only
> *true* test would be one from Data Communications or similar.
> /cah

More information about the NANOG mailing list