On Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:29:01 PM Waris Sagheer (waris) wrote: > Hi Mark,
Hello Waris. > - 48 gig port switch requirement, I suppose you also need > 4x10Gig uplink along with 48 Gig port, correct? Yes, we'd need at least 4x 10Gbps uplink SPF+ ports for a switch that came with 48x Gig-E ports. Of course, the assumption is that you could only uplink 40Gbps, but assuming all ports can run at line rate, that should not limit local switching between Gig-E ports if customers are communicating with one another via the same switch. > - Per > pop growth, I'll get get back to you with a solution to > seek your feedback Many thanks, Waris. > - Can you give me an idea in terms of > number of FIB entries requirement? I think a compromise between cost of the switch vs. where the world is going re: IPv4 and IPv6 table growth, I'd be happy if Cisco can support 1,000,000 FIB entries (whether IPv4, IPv6 or MPLS) in newer hardware provided it doesn't break the bank. I think anything more than that and this product line quickly begins to lose its appeal as an Access IP/MPLS router with high port density, since it will start to cost more and we're back to square one. But like I said, this is not such a real issues for me, personally, as this switch line has more important things to do like remove STP from the Access rings :-). So even if you were to bump current FIB slots by just even double, I'm sure someone out there would be happy. > - Can you elaborate > your comment "(particularly coming as close to the > flexibility of what software routers like the 7200 can > do)"? Any 7200 example functionality. I was referring to MQC, and how on software routers, it can really do anything you want. On hardware-based platforms, you find certain QoS features aren't supported, e.g., when the ME3600X/3800X first shipped, there were restrictions on QoS match conditions (match-any vs. match-all), queue depth limitations, how interface bandwidth %'s were allocated in QoS policy maps, e.t.c. Of course, since these QoS configurations get programmed into hardware, there is little margin for flexibility than when compared to a software-based router; so what I mean is, wherever possible, making QoS on the ME3600X/3800X as flexible as we have it on the software- based routers, assuming the hardware can do it without adverse side effects on another functionality of the switch. Cheers, Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/