Unless i'm reading something wrong, both have $15000 as a GPL price. -- Tassos
Dirk-Jan van Helmond wrote on 20/2/2008 7:30 μμ: > The 3CXL will work with a Sup720/3BXL, but will (ofcourse) operate in 3BXL > mode. no disadvantage (except financially). > > The 3CXL has some more features than the 3BXL, the ones i know of: > - more MAC addresses > - 3CXL is needed for vss-1440 > > > grtz, > Dirk > > >> I think i haven't made it clear enough.... >> >> Let's suppose i have the following 2 systems: >> >> 6500/SUP720-3BXL >> 6724-SFP (DFC-3CXL) >> >> 6500/SUP720-3BXL >> 6724-SFP (DFC-3BXL) >> >> If i'm not mistaken both will operate in 3BXL mode, so what is the >> disadvantage of the first one? >> >> >> Now, suppose i also have the following 2 systems: >> >> 7600/RSP720-3CXL >> 6724-SFP (DFC-3CXL) >> >> 7600/RSP720-3CXL >> 6724-SFP (DFC-3BXL) >> >> If i'm not mistaken, the first one will operate in 3CXL, while the second >> one in 3BXL. >> So the first one would be better (in what terms? That is my secondary >> question). >> >> Generally, why should i choose 3BXL, when with a 3CXL i can have a 3BXL >> plus something more? That is my primary question. >> >> >> Regards, >> Tassos >> >> Arie Vayner (avayner) wrote on 20/2/2008 6:20 i`i`: >>> Tassos, >>> >>> Basically, if you have a Sup720-3B, it means you have a PFC3B. >>> If you have a module with DFC-3BXL then you will gain nothing, as the >>> DFC has to match with the PFC model, so basically even though you have >>> DFC-3BXL, it would operate in 3B mode. >>> >>> The same works the other way. If you have Sup720-3BXL and DFC-3B on some >>> module, you would basically force the whole router to work in 3B mode. >>> >>> The reason for this is very simple. The DFC is basically a distributed >>> replica of the central PFC, so they can only operate in the same mode. >>> >>> Arie >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 18:11 PM >>> To: Arie Vayner (avayner) >>> Cc: cisco-nsp >>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] DFC-3BXL vs DFC-3CXL >>> >>> Hi Arie, >>> >>> Can you please explain the "has to be matched" part? >>> >>> I have both 6500/SUP720 and 7600/RSP720 systems and i would prefer to >>> get DFC-3CXL cards (instead of DFC-3BXL), so i can use them at their >>> maximum efficiency in both systems (interchangeably). Isn't that >>> possible? >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Tassos >>> >>> Arie Vayner (avayner) wrote on 20/2/2008 6:00 i`i`: >>>> Tassos, >>>> >>>> DFC-3CXL is used with RSP720, while DFC-3BXL is used with SUP720. >>>> The DFC has to be matched with the RSP/SUP module, as it is basically a >>>> replica of the PFC. >>>> >>>> Arie >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tassos >>>> Chatzithomaoglou >>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 17:41 PM >>>> To: cisco-nsp >>>> Subject: [c-nsp] DFC-3BXL vs DFC-3CXL >>>> >>>> I'm looking for a document describing the differences between these 2 >>>> DFC modules. >>>> >>>> Looking through various CCO pages, the only difference i found was the >>>> number of mac addresses supported (64k vs 96k). >>>> Is there anything else i'm missing? >>>> >>>> Also, has anyone used DFC-3CXL with 67xx modules on a 6500/SUP720-3BXL >>>> system? >>>> I guess they get downgraded to 3BXL, but since their price is the same, >>>> why not get the newer ones? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Tassos >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net >>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >>>> >>>> >>> > > > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/