On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 10:33:00PM +0200, Gunther Stammwitz wrote: > > I don't agree. > > The MLX can handle up to 512K IPV4 Routes in hardware (=the FIB) and the > total size of possible BGP4 IPV4-routes in the RIB is 2 millions. This means > you can have up to four full views with 512k routes each.
Yes the MLX is a bit better off than the Cisco 3B's on CAM. Remember that 512k IPv4 only counts if you don't use the resources anywhere else like v6, MPLS, etc. BTW all of the numbers for v4 RIB capacity, BGP peers, etc, are completely arbitrary and for marketing purposes only. The reality is based on the amount of ram in the system, the efficiency of he code being run on it, and how many stupid hard-coded assumptions have been made in said code that limits internal resources. The memory is just DDR333 PC2700 too, $150 will get you a nice 2GB DIMM for the MGMT, same as what comes on the XMR. > The foundry box is much more powerful than the Cisco gear you mentioned and > cannot be compared since forwarding is done in hardware on the line cards > and not via software like the 7600 does. I think you're confused, nothing in the above statement is even close to true. The architecture of these boxes are roughly the same, but there are advantages and disadvantages to each difference. The Foundry MLX/XMR uses a large number of centralized dumb cell-switching fabrics to interconnect cards, and distributes the routing intelligence to each linecard. The Cisco equiv on the other hand comes with centralied routing intelligence by default (PFC), and allows you to add daughter cards to distribute the routing (DFC) and achieve roughly the same performance numbers. The Foundry wins hands down in performance unless you stuff your 7600 cards with DFCs which add significantly to the cost, but the tradeoff is that you're buying loads of tcam you may not need, and you can't upgrade those cards or make them interoperate between MLX/XMR. There is a tradeoff on density too. The Foundry wins hands down on density for 10GE by using half-width slots, but Cisco win on density for 1GE because of there is only enough physical space to put half of the interfaces the Foundry is capable of supporting onto the card. Same thing in price. Bit for bit the Foundry is much cheaper when maxed out, but because it doesn't come in any "mid-range" capacity flavors you can end up spending 33-50% more in absolute dollars for an equiv Foundry solution because you're buying capacity you don't need. Point being, for everything in life there is a tradeoff. The new Foundry platforms are actually very interesting boxes, worth taking a good hard look at by anyone, but at the end of the day boxes that move a bazillion bits under simple lab conditions are a dime a dozen. It is software that makes the product, this is something that folks like Cisco and Juniper understand but that most other vendors do not. That said, if your network is simple enough and you don't need all of those interesting features (and if you have to ask or hell if you are even reading this list at all you probably don't), the MLX/XMR may be the box for you. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
