On 5 March 2018 at 08:42, Mikael Abrahamsson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, Arie Vayner wrote: > >> My gut feeling tells me the performance will be the same for irb and >> regular routing. These are software routers, so the performance depends on >> how many and which features you enable. > > > There is a huge performance difference (at least in older routers and older > software) between CEF-enabled forwarding paths and non-CEF-enabled > forwarding paths, even on CPU based routers. > > Look for routerperformance.pdf and compare "process switching" and "fast/CEF > switching". There is often 5-20x difference in pps. So at least back then it > was important to use features that were CEF enabled, otherwise performance > would go down a lot.
I thought that IRB did use CEF on the ISR-G2s? Cheers, James. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
