[c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations
Hi folks. Looking for some input on a network design. Today, pair of 6509's with Sup2/MSFC2 and a Cisco 12012 GSR make up the distribution and core routing. What I'm considering is removing the 12012 because of the space it consumes (does all BGP today) and replacing it with a pair of 7606's Sup720-3BXL etc For BGP edge that's feeding 3 full BGP transit feeds and a couple hundred peering sessions will the Sup720-3BXL cope ok from a memory perspective. The traffic is not a lot (500Mb/s or so) on this network . My final version would be a pair of 6509's doing core switching (distribution layer routing) in a mesh configuration to a pair of 7606's doing core routing .. Should I be looking at small GSR's for the core routing instead? Thanks for any feedback.. We have lots of 6500's but everyone keeps telling me lately to go 7600 series instead?? Paul ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations
Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:02:15PM -0400, Paul Stewart wrote: What I'm considering is removing the 12012 because of the space it consumes (does all BGP today) and replacing it with a pair of 7606's Sup720-3BXL etc For BGP edge that's feeding 3 full BGP transit feeds and a couple hundred peering sessions will the Sup720-3BXL cope ok from a memory perspective. The Sup720 is not very fast, regarding CPU wise (= BGP update handling) but it will handle 3 full feeds just fine. If you want a faster CPU, you might want to check the RSP720, but beware (see below). The traffic is not a lot (500Mb/s or so) on this network . Traffic-wise, the Sup720 *is* fast :-) Thanks for any feedback.. We have lots of 6500's but everyone keeps telling me lately to go 7600 series instead?? Basically it's the same thing. And with IOS 12.2SX*, there was no difference, except chassis colour. Then came the 7600 business unit (BU) inside Cisco and decided we're going to sell Real Routers, can't have this switch chassis crap around! and forked a software train (12.2SRA/SRB/SRC) that nowadays doesn't run on chassis that are labeled 6500 anymore. Just because they do an EEPROM check. Otherwise there is still no difference. There is some new hardware - the RSP720, the ES20 line cards, and the 7600-S chassis - that are *only* supported by SR* software. OTOH, there are LAN style line cards, notably the 6708 8x10GE card, that only just recently have been supported in SRC, and as far as I have heard, SRC is not very mature yet. Politely said. OTOH, there is the 6500 business unit, that targets enterprises - their IOS fork is 12.2SXH these days. They build nice things that ISPs might want to have as well, like modular IOS with restartable processes in case BGP leaks memory (and, in theory, upgrades-without-reboot, and such), the Sup720-10G supervisor engine, and thus. Until recently, buying a 7600+Sup720 and running SXF/SXH was what we considered future proof - you have a chassis that supports all the software that's out there, and are saved from the internal politics bullshit. Unfortunately, that's not completely true anymore - the 7600-S chassis are NOT supported by SXH IOS, and as far as we have been told, there are no plans to do so. So - what's the summary? Cisco internal politics is hurting customers. Whatever you decide upon, you'll be f***ed in a year or so. Get a Juniper M7i. For your traffic needs, it's definitely fast enough - and the CPU to handle the BGP updates is much faster. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED] fax: +49-89-35655025[EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpYtMTp0eJcK.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations
Thanks Gert... appreciate your open approach to this ;) I'm hoping to sell some ideas internally on a 5 year plan long time to justify anything it seems anymore... Is there a GSR/switch combo I could use intead? We've had GSR's and they are rock solid, turn them on and forget them boxes ... at least for us if we went GSR route, perhaps I could look at 4500 series switches or similar then Cost is always a consideration but I'm trying to combine scalability, redundancy, and future-proof all in one... I know it's like a dream but if I can be reasonably close than all the better Paul -Original Message- From: Gert Doering [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 1:13 PM To: Paul Stewart Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:02:15PM -0400, Paul Stewart wrote: What I'm considering is removing the 12012 because of the space it consumes (does all BGP today) and replacing it with a pair of 7606's Sup720-3BXL etc For BGP edge that's feeding 3 full BGP transit feeds and a couple hundred peering sessions will the Sup720-3BXL cope ok from a memory perspective. The Sup720 is not very fast, regarding CPU wise (= BGP update handling) but it will handle 3 full feeds just fine. If you want a faster CPU, you might want to check the RSP720, but beware (see below). The traffic is not a lot (500Mb/s or so) on this network . Traffic-wise, the Sup720 *is* fast :-) Thanks for any feedback.. We have lots of 6500's but everyone keeps telling me lately to go 7600 series instead?? Basically it's the same thing. And with IOS 12.2SX*, there was no difference, except chassis colour. Then came the 7600 business unit (BU) inside Cisco and decided we're going to sell Real Routers, can't have this switch chassis crap around! and forked a software train (12.2SRA/SRB/SRC) that nowadays doesn't run on chassis that are labeled 6500 anymore. Just because they do an EEPROM check. Otherwise there is still no difference. There is some new hardware - the RSP720, the ES20 line cards, and the 7600-S chassis - that are *only* supported by SR* software. OTOH, there are LAN style line cards, notably the 6708 8x10GE card, that only just recently have been supported in SRC, and as far as I have heard, SRC is not very mature yet. Politely said. OTOH, there is the 6500 business unit, that targets enterprises - their IOS fork is 12.2SXH these days. They build nice things that ISPs might want to have as well, like modular IOS with restartable processes in case BGP leaks memory (and, in theory, upgrades-without-reboot, and such), the Sup720-10G supervisor engine, and thus. Until recently, buying a 7600+Sup720 and running SXF/SXH was what we considered future proof - you have a chassis that supports all the software that's out there, and are saved from the internal politics bullshit. Unfortunately, that's not completely true anymore - the 7600-S chassis are NOT supported by SXH IOS, and as far as we have been told, there are no plans to do so. So - what's the summary? Cisco internal politics is hurting customers. Whatever you decide upon, you'll be f***ed in a year or so. Get a Juniper M7i. For your traffic needs, it's definitely fast enough - and the CPU to handle the BGP updates is much faster. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED] fax: +49-89-35655025 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations
Or you may want to look into the new ASR routers. They are supposed to be positioned between the 7200's and the 7600's, but it doesn't sound like you are really pushing that much traffic through the system. If you need it now it's probably not an option, but if you are looking to what would be ideal in the near future this may be the answer. Fred Reimer, CISSP, CCNP, CQS-VPN, CQS-ISS Senior Network Engineer Coleman Technologies, Inc. 954-298-1697 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 1:13 PM To: Paul Stewart Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:02:15PM -0400, Paul Stewart wrote: What I'm considering is removing the 12012 because of the space it consumes (does all BGP today) and replacing it with a pair of 7606's Sup720-3BXL etc For BGP edge that's feeding 3 full BGP transit feeds and a couple hundred peering sessions will the Sup720-3BXL cope ok from a memory perspective. The Sup720 is not very fast, regarding CPU wise (= BGP update handling) but it will handle 3 full feeds just fine. If you want a faster CPU, you might want to check the RSP720, but beware (see below). The traffic is not a lot (500Mb/s or so) on this network . Traffic-wise, the Sup720 *is* fast :-) Thanks for any feedback.. We have lots of 6500's but everyone keeps telling me lately to go 7600 series instead?? Basically it's the same thing. And with IOS 12.2SX*, there was no difference, except chassis colour. Then came the 7600 business unit (BU) inside Cisco and decided we're going to sell Real Routers, can't have this switch chassis crap around! and forked a software train (12.2SRA/SRB/SRC) that nowadays doesn't run on chassis that are labeled 6500 anymore. Just because they do an EEPROM check. Otherwise there is still no difference. There is some new hardware - the RSP720, the ES20 line cards, and the 7600-S chassis - that are *only* supported by SR* software. OTOH, there are LAN style line cards, notably the 6708 8x10GE card, that only just recently have been supported in SRC, and as far as I have heard, SRC is not very mature yet. Politely said. OTOH, there is the 6500 business unit, that targets enterprises - their IOS fork is 12.2SXH these days. They build nice things that ISPs might want to have as well, like modular IOS with restartable processes in case BGP leaks memory (and, in theory, upgrades-without-reboot, and such), the Sup720-10G supervisor engine, and thus. Until recently, buying a 7600+Sup720 and running SXF/SXH was what we considered future proof - you have a chassis that supports all the software that's out there, and are saved from the internal politics bullshit. Unfortunately, that's not completely true anymore - the 7600-S chassis are NOT supported by SXH IOS, and as far as we have been told, there are no plans to do so. So - what's the summary? Cisco internal politics is hurting customers. Whatever you decide upon, you'll be f***ed in a year or so. Get a Juniper M7i. For your traffic needs, it's definitely fast enough - and the CPU to handle the BGP updates is much faster. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED] fax: +49-89-35655025 [EMAIL PROTECTED] smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations
Be very mindful of features here. The feature list for all but certain large carriers is pretty slim pickens. From: Fred Reimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:22:37 -0400 To: Gert Doering [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Conversation: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Or you may want to look into the new ASR routers. They are supposed to be positioned between the 7200's and the 7600's, but it doesn't sound like you are really pushing that much traffic through the system. If you need it now it's probably not an option, but if you are looking to what would be ideal in the near future this may be the answer. Fred Reimer, CISSP, CCNP, CQS-VPN, CQS-ISS Senior Network Engineer Coleman Technologies, Inc. 954-298-1697 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 1:13 PM To: Paul Stewart Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:02:15PM -0400, Paul Stewart wrote: What I'm considering is removing the 12012 because of the space it consumes (does all BGP today) and replacing it with a pair of 7606's Sup720-3BXL etc For BGP edge that's feeding 3 full BGP transit feeds and a couple hundred peering sessions will the Sup720-3BXL cope ok from a memory perspective. The Sup720 is not very fast, regarding CPU wise (= BGP update handling) but it will handle 3 full feeds just fine. If you want a faster CPU, you might want to check the RSP720, but beware (see below). The traffic is not a lot (500Mb/s or so) on this network . Traffic-wise, the Sup720 *is* fast :-) Thanks for any feedback.. We have lots of 6500's but everyone keeps telling me lately to go 7600 series instead?? Basically it's the same thing. And with IOS 12.2SX*, there was no difference, except chassis colour. Then came the 7600 business unit (BU) inside Cisco and decided we're going to sell Real Routers, can't have this switch chassis crap around! and forked a software train (12.2SRA/SRB/SRC) that nowadays doesn't run on chassis that are labeled 6500 anymore. Just because they do an EEPROM check. Otherwise there is still no difference. There is some new hardware - the RSP720, the ES20 line cards, and the 7600-S chassis - that are *only* supported by SR* software. OTOH, there are LAN style line cards, notably the 6708 8x10GE card, that only just recently have been supported in SRC, and as far as I have heard, SRC is not very mature yet. Politely said. OTOH, there is the 6500 business unit, that targets enterprises - their IOS fork is 12.2SXH these days. They build nice things that ISPs might want to have as well, like modular IOS with restartable processes in case BGP leaks memory (and, in theory, upgrades-without-reboot, and such), the Sup720-10G supervisor engine, and thus. Until recently, buying a 7600+Sup720 and running SXF/SXH was what we considered future proof - you have a chassis that supports all the software that's out there, and are saved from the internal politics bullshit. Unfortunately, that's not completely true anymore - the 7600-S chassis are NOT supported by SXH IOS, and as far as we have been told, there are no plans to do so. So - what's the summary? Cisco internal politics is hurting customers. Whatever you decide upon, you'll be f***ed in a year or so. Get a Juniper M7i. For your traffic needs, it's definitely fast enough - and the CPU to handle the BGP updates is much faster. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED] fax: +49-89-35655025 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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/ This email and any attachments (Message) may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the addressee, or if this Message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute it, and we ask that you please delete it (including all copies) and notify the sender by return email. Delivery of this Message to any person other than the intended recipient(s) shall not be deemed a waiver of confidentiality and/or a privilege. ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations
Absolutely, that's why I said if you need it now it is probably not an option. However, that will change with time. I expect the feature list to be mostly complete a year from now. If it is a question of long-term planning then the platform should be considered. Fred Reimer, CISSP, CCNP, CQS-VPN, CQS-ISS Senior Network Engineer Coleman Technologies, Inc. 954-298-1697 -Original Message- From: David Curran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 4:03 PM To: Fred Reimer; Gert Doering; Paul Stewart Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Be very mindful of features here. The feature list for all but certain large carriers is pretty slim pickens. From: Fred Reimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:22:37 -0400 To: Gert Doering [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Conversation: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Or you may want to look into the new ASR routers. They are supposed to be positioned between the 7200's and the 7600's, but it doesn't sound like you are really pushing that much traffic through the system. If you need it now it's probably not an option, but if you are looking to what would be ideal in the near future this may be the answer. Fred Reimer, CISSP, CCNP, CQS-VPN, CQS-ISS Senior Network Engineer Coleman Technologies, Inc. 954-298-1697 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 1:13 PM To: Paul Stewart Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP Router Considerations Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:02:15PM -0400, Paul Stewart wrote: What I'm considering is removing the 12012 because of the space it consumes (does all BGP today) and replacing it with a pair of 7606's Sup720-3BXL etc For BGP edge that's feeding 3 full BGP transit feeds and a couple hundred peering sessions will the Sup720-3BXL cope ok from a memory perspective. The Sup720 is not very fast, regarding CPU wise (= BGP update handling) but it will handle 3 full feeds just fine. If you want a faster CPU, you might want to check the RSP720, but beware (see below). The traffic is not a lot (500Mb/s or so) on this network . Traffic-wise, the Sup720 *is* fast :-) Thanks for any feedback.. We have lots of 6500's but everyone keeps telling me lately to go 7600 series instead?? Basically it's the same thing. And with IOS 12.2SX*, there was no difference, except chassis colour. Then came the 7600 business unit (BU) inside Cisco and decided we're going to sell Real Routers, can't have this switch chassis crap around! and forked a software train (12.2SRA/SRB/SRC) that nowadays doesn't run on chassis that are labeled 6500 anymore. Just because they do an EEPROM check. Otherwise there is still no difference. There is some new hardware - the RSP720, the ES20 line cards, and the 7600-S chassis - that are *only* supported by SR* software. OTOH, there are LAN style line cards, notably the 6708 8x10GE card, that only just recently have been supported in SRC, and as far as I have heard, SRC is not very mature yet. Politely said. OTOH, there is the 6500 business unit, that targets enterprises - their IOS fork is 12.2SXH these days. They build nice things that ISPs might want to have as well, like modular IOS with restartable processes in case BGP leaks memory (and, in theory, upgrades-without-reboot, and such), the Sup720-10G supervisor engine, and thus. Until recently, buying a 7600+Sup720 and running SXF/SXH was what we considered future proof - you have a chassis that supports all the software that's out there, and are saved from the internal politics bullshit. Unfortunately, that's not completely true anymore - the 7600-S chassis are NOT supported by SXH IOS, and as far as we have been told, there are no plans to do so. So - what's the summary? Cisco internal politics is hurting customers. Whatever you decide upon, you'll be f***ed in a year or so. Get a Juniper M7i. For your traffic needs, it's definitely fast enough - and the CPU to handle the BGP updates is much faster. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [EMAIL PROTECTED] fax: +49-89-35655025 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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/ This email and any attachments (Message) may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the addressee, or if this Message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute it, and we ask that you please delete it (including all copies
