What Platform for a small ISP (was: Cisco 7600 (7609) as a core BGP router)
dstorandt at teljet.com
Wed Jul 22 13:43:08 CDT 2009
Why are you a "small start-up" and needing 600M-1G of pipe, and from
3x carriers? You can't use 150-200M via GigE ports and scale as needed
(assuming you aren't bound to a SONET loop)?
We started our IP backbone in 2005 with 3x 300M connections on
6509/maxed-Sup2s with 85% BGP tables and 6516-GBIC blades. All of our
drops were GBE or 10/100, no SONET, no fancy stuff. 3x nodes meshed.
Redundancy was our only mandatory requirement. Everything worked well,
until we started getting more sophisticated. This setup now could run
$5-6k/node if you shop around.
Since then, prices have dropped on more powerful stuff and persistent
EOL progression, so if you can pull off funds for Sup720-3BXL engines,
you've got options for 10G, IP6, MPLS, and full tables from day one,
although 10G ports are not cheap (for a shoestring one, at least). I
would consider Sup720-3Bs as a minimum for that platform, considering
EOL and features.
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:57 AM, R. Benjamin Kessler<rbk at mnsginc.com> wrote:
> On 7/22/09 9:48 AM, Jim Wininger <jwininger at indianafiber.net> wrote:
>> What do you consider a "small start-up ISP"? What kind of upstream
>> connectivity are you considering (or at least falls under the category
>> small isp) bandwidht, bgp etc?
> two or three upstreams - OC-12 to 1G to each (BGP full tables)
> three "POPs" meshed together
>>> On 7/22/09 9:39 AM, "R. Benjamin Kessler" <rbk at mnsginc.com> wrote:
>>> There has been a lot of good feedback regarding the deficiencies of
>>> 7600 platform...
>>> So, the new question is: what platforms should a small, start-up ISP
>>> consider when looking to provide Ethernet services to their
>>> - Scalability - 100M, 1G, 10G access speeds (backplane limitations,
>>> number of ports per chassis, etc.)
>>> - MPLS Capabilities
>>> - QoS Features
>>> - Ease of configuration and support, etc. (finding NOC talent,
>>> tools, etc.)
>>> - Software/Hardware "stability" and "longevity" (we don't want
>>> that is brand-new and therefore "buggy" nor do we want something that
>>> going EOL next year)
>>> - Bang for the buck (both acquisition and on-going maintenance and
>>> I'm sure I'm missing a lot of things...are there any good
>>> from previous NANOG meetings that one should review?
>>> Thanks in advance,
More information about the NANOG