Hi Tony,
Thanks for the very informative reply, I had a feeling that we might
need to replace the 2600s but it's good to have it confirmed :-)
Given that we only require packet switching and ACL features in these
remote sites we will probably go for L3 switches, 3750s most likely.
Regards,
Terence
-------- Original Message --------
*Subject: *Re: [c-nsp] How do ACLs effect throughput
*From: *Tony <[email protected]>
*To: *Cisco-NSP <[email protected]>, Terence Scott
<[email protected]>
*Date: *13 July 2011 03:56:11 PM
Hi Terence,
As per the Cisco Router Performance link already posted by someone else these
routers will NOT handle anything much above 10Mbps (and even that is a
struggle).
You are going to require an upgrade.
If you are planning on trying to use the full 100Mbps link then you should in
theory be looking at 3800 or any of the G2 ISR models (1900/2900/3900). I don't
have any personal experience with them, but someone else might have something
to add about real world performance from them.
If you want something cheap and second hand you could look at an old 7200 with
NPE-300/400/G1 in it. You should be able to get an I/O card that has 2x 10/100
ports on it, so not need to add any modules to it.
You will also need to consider how the services are handed off to you. If they
are fiber then you might want to look at a router that has SFP ports built into
it instead of having to use an external fibre/copper converter. A quick check
shows that 3800, some of the 2900 and all of the 3900 have SFP ports on them.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10537/prod_series_comparison.html
As for the question of how ACL's affect throughput, I'm not sure if there is
any real hit on these routers ? Perhaps someone else might be able to elaborate
if they know one way or the other.
regards,
Tony.
--- On Wed, 13/7/11, Terence Scott<[email protected]> wrote:
From: Terence Scott<[email protected]>
Subject: [c-nsp] How do ACLs effect throughput
To: "Cisco-NSP"<[email protected]>
Received: Wednesday, 13 July, 2011, 6:52 PM
Dear all,
My organisation has two (old) Cisco 2600 series routers
deployed in two remote sites, one 2620 and one 2621. So far
these routers have been performing very well, however we are
now looking at substantially increasing the bandwidth of the
WAN links that connect these two remote sites to the central
office. At present these remote sites connect to the central
office via 4Mbps ADSL lines and we will be upgrading these
to 100Mbps (full-duplex) optical fibre links. We are
essentially trying to determine whether these old routers
will still be able to handle the increased traffic load or
whether we need to upgrade the routers as well. The
information we have managed to find so far suggests that
these routers would be able to cope if all packet switching
is done in CEF. The set-up in these remote sites is quite
simple and we only use extended IP access lists in order to
control access to certain VLANs. Does anybody know whether
these ACLs would cause the traffic to be punted from CEF to
process switching?
Many thanks
Terence
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
