Quite right I think. Cisco are very good at documenting Configuration scenarios for all of their platforms. It might be a good idea to document 'guideline' or lab tested throughputs for various platforms. It may not always be feasible - given the range, but it would help I think.
Lets call it, 'An Engineers Guide to Cisco Performance Recommendations - Based on Pre-configured Scenarios' :) Stephen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Rathlev Sent: 27 September 2010 17:41 To: Keegan Holley Cc: Cisco NSPs Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ISR G2 performance On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 11:33 -0400, Keegan Holley wrote: > I'm a little annoyed by their stance though. I just want them to make a > recommendation that I can use instead of trying to fill my head with > marketing nonsense. I personally don't see "routerperformance.pdf" as marketing nonsense. It gives you a basic figure to work with and makes it possible to compare different platforms. Of course a set of standard cases could be documented, e.g. "simple NAT, one inside and one outside interface" or "simple LLQ with this specific configuration". But one man's standard setup is an exotic setup for many of his colleagues. If Cisco were to announce "best case" forwarding figures, I would call that marketing nonsense. :-) -- Peter _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
