2014-01-14 21:27 skrev Saku Ytti:
> On (2014-01-14 21:44 +0200), Mark Tinka wrote: > >> The ME2600X is great, but lacks the Layer 3 and MPLS capabilities (along >> with a few QoS restrictions, but still better than any other switches in >> Cisco's arsenal). > > I took a look at ME2600X recently, looks like forwarding-plane is StrataXGS > Triumph BCM56624 and control-plane is QorIQ P2020. > > Forwarding-plane seem very capable. And you actually can configure MPLS on it, > LDP gets up, CEF gets populated, even platform specific commands imply HW is > programmed for labels. Didn't push any traffic through it, I'll try to find > time/motivation in next few weeks to test if it actually work (not that I'm > going to use MPLS on it, as it's not listed as being supported so that's big > no-no) > But why did Cisco see this much trouble with MPLS, unless they planned to > start supporting it? And they pretty much have to, if they want to compete > with SAS-M. I heard something that it might get L3 and MPLS in the future. Can't be sure though. If it got that it would make a very nice access device. I'm not sure why the documentation sucks so badly for it though. Maybe it is another BU that has it? Otherwise Waris and others have done a great job on documenting 3600/3800. Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
