Honestly with the aging hardware for the 6500s and 7600s I would go with an ASR1004/6. The only thing you won't have is port density like on a 6500. Obviously a 6500 is a switch and a 1004/6 is a router. If you need the port density you can go with the ASR1006-X which has EPAs (Less room for SIPs). An ASR1006 has the availability of 1+1 RP and 1+1 ESP which means it is more expensive than a 1004. If you want a guideline a fully loaded 1006 with 3 SIP10s, 2 ESP20s, 2 RP2s, a couple of 8 Port 1G SPAs, some 1 Port 10G SPAs and a few 4 Port Channelized DS3 cards will run you around 60k-70k.
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Howard Leadmon <[email protected]> wrote: > FYI, the version I am currently running is 12.2(33)SXJ1, and though I know > it's not the newest thing going, it for sure has served us well with an > uptime of 4 years, 51 weeks, 4 days, 19 minutes as of this message. I > have little doubt that a reboot may free up some memory, if nothing else > some more contiguous chunks, but from all I have read here recently, with > taking full routes this is a short term stop gap measure at best. > > So what I am trying to figure out, is what is a good path forward that > will > last more than a couple months at best. As mentioned below, I have > looked > at just using the RSP720-3CXL as it will take a lot more RAM reduce running > on the edge of a memory allocation failure (plus the faster CPU is good for > BGP). I have looked at using something like the ASR1004/6 as with a full > load of RAM it says it will easily do 4 million routes. Finally I know > someone that has a GSR12404 that suggested I use it, and though I know it's > not new platform, I can't for the life of me figure out what routing limits > it has. I for sure need 1G and 10G interfaces (not a lot), also need > 32bit > ASN support as we already use it at the IX > > The reboot of the current switch would be easy, but if I need to take the > time to haul around big switches/routers, and changing the network around, > I > figure it just makes good sense to learn what I can to make an informed > choice as much as possible. > > > Happy 4th to any that celebrate it.. > > > --- > Howard Leadmon - [email protected] > PBW Communications, LLC > http://www.pbwcomm.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jon Lewis [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Monday, July 4, 2016 9:34 AM > > To: Howard Leadmon <[email protected]> > > Cc: 'cisco-nsp' <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SUP720's memory, looking at options.. > > > > On Mon, 4 Jul 2016, Howard Leadmon wrote: > > > > > I knew with the 720-3BXL's I was running, that eventually the TCAM > > > would become an issue, but it seemed like I still had a little bit of > breathing > > > room left. Then I saw the chatter here about the RAM on the RP > > exhausting > > > before the TCAM, so went peeking at the switch after reading an earlier > > > thread. Sure enough, though TCAM was starting to get full, to my > > > surprise when I looked at memory, it was at 92%, so even closer than > > > the TCAM by far to exhaustion. > > > > > > I know I can't just up the RAM on the board, so that now leads me to > > > wonder what are reasonable options to resolve this before it becomes a > > very real > > > and big problem. First let me say, compared to many here we are small > > > guys, we have a limited budget, and our 6509 has served us well for a > great > > > many years, I think it's about to pass the 5yr uptime mark. We have > 2-3 > > > full feeds as uptime is important, and we also peer at the Equinix IX, > > > so have a bunch of additional peering sessions. > > > > Some of the software versions for the 6500 have had BGP related memory > > leaks, and if you've got an uptime of 5yrs, that means you're not exactly > > running recent code, and have had a lot of time for memory to get > > misplaced. I no longer have access to a 6500 with full feeds, so I don't > know if > > 3 full feeds + an IX should be running you out of memory. An > > upgrade/reboot might be worth a try though. I'd stay in whatever major > > version you're in though...not try jumping to a much later version that > might > > be even more memory hungry. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route > > | therefore you are _________ > > http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________ > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
