FYI, the 12000 series channelized oc12 line cards are supported by IOS XR as well, and used chassis+PRP-2+oc12 hardware should be well below the cost of a used 7600+sup720+sip+spa combo...
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/xr12000/software/xr12k_r3.9/general/release/notes/reln_391xr12k.html sc On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Rob Shakir <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Geoff, > > A couple of comments - we're currently running a bunch of 7600 with a bunch > of chSTM-1 SPAs in SIP-200 for n*DS0 -> DS-3 aggregation, so hopefully some > of our experiences might be of interest. > > We've actually found the 7600 with SIPs to be really reliable boxes, after > a few issues in early SRC, with newer software, we haven't had any problems > with these boxes. We're doing HDLC, some frame-relay legacy support, and > MLPPP across E1 or STM-1 bearers. We've got a set of issues with the way > that some alarms are parsed, which I've explained below, but in general > we're pretty happy with these 7600s! It's worth mentioning too that the > SIP-200 is relatively good at providing some relatively useful features, so > for example, doing LLQ inside a customer E1 is something that we've > standardised on this platform. > > I'm not sure that I can provide a good comparison against the ASR, but I > don't think that the GSR option sounds cost effective in general. You will > probably be aware that the 12000 series GSRs are EoS, which means that you > will find that getting upgraded code (if you bought used hardware) is not > possible. In addition, it is worth checking that 12.0(32)S(Y)? or 12.0(33)S > support the features that you need. > > On 13 May 2010, at 17:12, Geoffrey Pendery wrote: > > So my real questions : > > 1. Anybody have experience with this particular SPA? Good/bad? > > Whilst not specifically this SPA - but the choc3/stm-1 variant of it, at > least in the SDH world, there are ongoing issues with the parsing of the POH > for a VC-12 channel. Cisco did not implement full parsing of the V5 byte, so > therefore they are able to recognise only AIS for a specific VC-12. This is > somewhat inconvenient when your provider doesn't send AIS on unequipped > channels, and hence (correctly) sends LPUNEQ alarms. > > This is really inconvenient for us, since it causes issues with parsing of > alarms that were available on older CHSTM-1 hardware. I am not sure whether > this would have been the same for the choc-12/stm-4 card, but it might be > worth checking if this is something that you're going to rely on. > > > 2. If we went with 7600, we'd have to switch to SRD from SXH - what > > sort of nasty surprises should I expect there? > > We're much happier with SRD than we are with SXH as a train. Our target > release for 7600s at the moment is SRD4, and we haven't found anything > that's forced us to move away from it (yet!). > > Kind regards, > Rob > > -- > Rob Shakir <[email protected]> > Network Development Engineer GX Networks/Vialtus Solutions > ddi: +44208 587 6077 mob: +44797 155 4098 > pgp: 0xc07e6deb nic-hdl: RJS-RIPE > > This email is subject to: http://www.vialtus.com/disclaimer.html > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > -- Stephen F. Cobb • Senior Sales Engineer CCNA/CCDA/DCNID/ATSP Telecoast Communications, LLC • Santa Barbara, CA o 877.677.1182 x272 • c 760.807.0570 • f 805.618.1610 aim/yahoo telecoaststephen _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
