The 7600 supports NSF/SSO (Non-Stop Forwarding, Stateful Supervisor
O(something)) essentially giving you the <5sec recovery but the neighbors
need to be NSF Aware.
Or you can use RPR+ (the 30secs version) and ensure your layer3 network
routes around the missing box in well under a second.
For our core - we're taking the second option.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Colton" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 12:07 AM
Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco 7600 vs ASR 9000
I work for a small CLEC, we have been doing FTTP for 5 years now but are
getting ready to update our core network and introduce IPTV services.
Cisco
has been recommending the Cisco 7600 as our core router. My concern is
that
cisco told us that in the event of an RSP fail over the 7600 could take up
to 30 seconds to begin routing packets again, this seems wrong to me since
my old Extreme Networks BD 6808 can do fail overs and rebuild route tables
in under 5 seconds but?? More recently I have been reading up on the ASR
9000 however and it appears that it would be better sized for our company
than the 7600. A few questions I have for the group.
1. Has anyone used the ASR 9000 in place of a Cisco 7600?
2. Is the ASR 9000 Carrier ready? Meaning 5x9's of availability, few
component failures, solid software...etc
3. Has anyone had issues where it took the 7600 30 seconds to start
routing
again after an RSP fail over?
Thanks,
Nick
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
__________ NOD32 4448 (20090922) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
