Hi, On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 04:49:12PM +0100, [email protected] wrote: > Thanks. I had (perhaps foolishly) assumed that moving from an NPE-G1 to a > Sup720-3BXL-based platform would represent an upgrade from the 7206VXR (as > well as having the advantage of bringing our Internet BGP tier in-line > with the rest of our core network from a hardware perspective). > > When comparing the NPE-G1 to a Sup720-3BXL for the purposes of being an > internet-facing BGP router am I actually proposing a backwards step?
The CPU on the Sup720 is slower, so "load a full BGP table from 5 peers"
will take longer.
OTOH, "100% CPU due to BGP" on the Sup720 doesn't impact packet forwarding
capacity, as that's done by other bits of the hardware - so depending on
traffic mix and BGP churn (and number of peers) the Sup720 will vastly
outperform the NPE-G1 :-)
As a reference: we're currently using Sup720s as peering and upstream
routers, and we've been quite happy most of the time.
Major causes for unhappiness: software bugs (can happen on all platforms),
hardware limitations (some things the hardware just cannot do), political
issues inside Cisco (6500/7600 in-fighting).
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected]
fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected]
pgp3BSWwjfFVm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
