On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 16:32 -0400, Steven Pfister wrote: > A couple of questions: > - if I have two FWSMs installed, they would load balance, and if one > failed, the other would take over all traffic, correct?
AFAIK they can only load balance in active/active mode if you create two contexts and place them each in their own primary FWSM. Put another way: Load balancing won't be there by default and it's a little tricky to implement if you're running a single context. It doesn't matter whether they're in the same chassis or not. > - The supervisor engine 720 and the supervisor engine 32... we'd need > one or the other, correct? You very probably need one of them, unless you want to go the Sup2 or Sup1A way, which you don't. :-) The "Sup720 vs. Sup32" subject is a lengthy one (search the archives) but the main differences (IMHO) is: - The 256k TCAM entry limitation in the non XL-versions of the PFCs, and Sup32 can only use a PFC3B, non-XL. This means no full BGP table. - Performance: 32 Gb/s bus (Sup32) vs. 2x20 Gb/s full mesh fabric (Sup720). - Sup32 can't use 6700-series interface modules (e.g. WS-X6748-GE-TX). > - Would we need the Policy Feature Card and the Distributed Forwarding > Card? Both are included in Sup32 and Sup720. For Sup720 you have to decide between a "regular" PFC or an XL-version. (There's also both a PFC3B and a PFC3C version of the Sup720, the latter having 10GE uplinks as the most visible difference.) Regards, Peter _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
