On 03/21/2011 09:41 PM, Greg Whynott wrote:
the 6500's are not very well suited for many roles these days in DC land,
especially if your into HPC. if you are using a policy engine such as the
FWSM, you now only have 4G if your traffic has to pass threw it. if memory
serves me correctly. We started seeing input drops which lead us to start a
deployment OSPF-ECMP so we could balance and route around the core 6500..
kinda sad when you consider the cost of the kit. we bought a pair of extreme
switches last round, they blow the socks of anything we have had from Cisco
(so far!) in terms of features, performance and cost of ownership.
just my opinion, i may be way off base.
Well, I think it depends on what you're doing.
It is certainly a poor platform for high-density 10gig. Many caveats and
cost is way, way too high. Transceiver tedium too :o(
Having said that, the truly tragic thing about the 6500 is that, until
recently, it still beat a lot of newer platforms on feature mix combined
with decent performance and reasonable (if not great) density.
It's entirely possible that we just have a very weird mix of
requirements, but I'm honestly not looking forward to replacing our
6500s - it's not obvious to me we can get the same feature mix, better
performance and good cost in a single device, which means a
re-architect, as well as higher cost in carrying spares :o(
Having said that, I won't be sorry to see the back of the crappy CPU and
12.2S IOS train ;o)
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
