Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Philip Dorr]

Would a RB1000 and HP Procurve work?

On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Matt Jenkins  wrote:
> Yikes $40k again. I am trying to come up with a sub $12k solution.
>
> On 09/11/2010 02:39 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
>> No I haven't. But I will look into it now. Let me know how your talk
>> with the sales guys goes?
>>
>> On 09/11/2010 02:38 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>>
>>> That makes sense.
>>> BGP over a VPLS VC shouldn't be any different than BGP across a
>>> Ethernet cable AFAIK.
>>>
>>> Have you checked out the Alcatel-Lucent SR series routers? I'm
>>> supposed to be talking to one of their sales reps next week. They nare
>>> really trying to gain market share and i hear hey have some good
>>> deals.
>>>
>>> On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins   
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
 I am thinking its time to use a switch as a switch and a router as a
 router. I am thinking about using this for the MPLS backbone and put in
 actual 7200/7300 routers at locations where full BGP needs to be
 offered. What I haven't yet worked out is whether two routers can
 establish a BGP peering session over a VPLS VC.


 On 09/11/2010 01:25 PM, Jon Auer wrote:


> Beware of the TCAM size on that box.
> IIRC it hasn't been able to take full internet routes since 2008
> because of that limitation.
>
> On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins  
>    wrote:
>
>
>
>> After many days of searching it looks like I found something in the sub
>> $20k range. The ME-C6524GT-8S appears to do it all.
>>
>> On 09/08/2010 04:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
>>> switches...
>>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>>
>>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>>
>>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>>> known to do.
>>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>>> router/route reflector.
>>>
>>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins 
>>>       wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
 I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T 
 ports
 with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
 suggestions?

 For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
 support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP 
 connections
 to customers from this ring of backhauls.

 - Matt


 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List:
>>
>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>
>> 

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Matt Jenkins]

Yikes $40k again. I am trying to come up with a sub $12k solution.

On 09/11/2010 02:39 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
> No I haven't. But I will look into it now. Let me know how your talk
> with the sales guys goes?
>
> On 09/11/2010 02:38 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>
>> That makes sense.
>> BGP over a VPLS VC shouldn't be any different than BGP across a
>> Ethernet cable AFAIK.
>>
>> Have you checked out the Alcatel-Lucent SR series routers? I'm
>> supposed to be talking to one of their sales reps next week. They nare
>> really trying to gain market share and i hear hey have some good
>> deals.
>>
>> On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins   
>> wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> I am thinking its time to use a switch as a switch and a router as a
>>> router. I am thinking about using this for the MPLS backbone and put in
>>> actual 7200/7300 routers at locations where full BGP needs to be
>>> offered. What I haven't yet worked out is whether two routers can
>>> establish a BGP peering session over a VPLS VC.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/11/2010 01:25 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>>>
>>>
 Beware of the TCAM size on that box.
 IIRC it hasn't been able to take full internet routes since 2008
 because of that limitation.

 On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins   
   wrote:


  
> After many days of searching it looks like I found something in the sub
> $20k range. The ME-C6524GT-8S appears to do it all.
>
> On 09/08/2010 04:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>
>
>
>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
>> switches...
>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>
>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>
>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>> known to do.
>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> router/route reflector.
>>
>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  
>>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>>> suggestions?
>>>
>>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>>
>>> - Matt
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>>  
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List:
>
>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>  
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Matt Jenkins]

No I haven't. But I will look into it now. Let me know how your talk 
with the sales guys goes?

On 09/11/2010 02:38 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> That makes sense.
> BGP over a VPLS VC shouldn't be any different than BGP across a
> Ethernet cable AFAIK.
>
> Have you checked out the Alcatel-Lucent SR series routers? I'm
> supposed to be talking to one of their sales reps next week. They nare
> really trying to gain market share and i hear hey have some good
> deals.
>
> On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins  
> wrote:
>
>> I am thinking its time to use a switch as a switch and a router as a
>> router. I am thinking about using this for the MPLS backbone and put in
>> actual 7200/7300 routers at locations where full BGP needs to be
>> offered. What I haven't yet worked out is whether two routers can
>> establish a BGP peering session over a VPLS VC.
>>
>>
>> On 09/11/2010 01:25 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>>  
>>> Beware of the TCAM size on that box.
>>> IIRC it hasn't been able to take full internet routes since 2008
>>> because of that limitation.
>>>
>>> On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
 After many days of searching it looks like I found something in the sub
 $20k range. The ME-C6524GT-8S appears to do it all.

 On 09/08/2010 04:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:

  
> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
> switches...
> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
> greater you aren't going to find that.
>
> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>
> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
> known to do.
> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
> router/route reflector.
>
> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
> the most straightforward solution to me.
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins   
>wrote:
>
>
>
>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>> suggestions?
>>
>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>
>> - Matt
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>>  
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List:
  
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jon Auer]

That makes sense.
BGP over a VPLS VC shouldn't be any different than BGP across a
Ethernet cable AFAIK.

Have you checked out the Alcatel-Lucent SR series routers? I'm
supposed to be talking to one of their sales reps next week. They nare
really trying to gain market share and i hear hey have some good
deals.

On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins  wrote:
> I am thinking its time to use a switch as a switch and a router as a
> router. I am thinking about using this for the MPLS backbone and put in
> actual 7200/7300 routers at locations where full BGP needs to be
> offered. What I haven't yet worked out is whether two routers can
> establish a BGP peering session over a VPLS VC.
>
>
> On 09/11/2010 01:25 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Beware of the TCAM size on that box.
>> IIRC it hasn't been able to take full internet routes since 2008
>> because of that limitation.
>>
>> On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> After many days of searching it looks like I found something in the sub
>>> $20k range. The ME-C6524GT-8S appears to do it all.
>>>
>>> On 09/08/2010 04:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>>>
 Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
 switches...
 You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
 RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
 greater you aren't going to find that.

 The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
 should be able to get it for $30-50K.

 Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
 known to do.
 Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
 the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
 reflector to the customer and vice versa.
 Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
 router/route reflector.

 Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
 the most straightforward solution to me.

 On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins    
 wrote:


> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> suggestions?
>
> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>
> - Matt
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List:



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Faisal Imtiaz]

-
What I haven't yet worked out is whether two routers can establish a BGP 
peering session over a VPLS VC.
-

Should not be any different than setting up BGP over a Physical 
Connection.. As long IP is being passed it should not be a problem.


Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, Fl 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 option 2 Email: supp...@snappydsl.net

On 9/11/2010 4:47 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
> I am thinking its time to use a switch as a switch and a router as a
> router. I am thinking about using this for the MPLS backbone and put in
> actual 7200/7300 routers at locations where full BGP needs to be
> offered. What I haven't yet worked out is whether two routers can
> establish a BGP peering session over a VPLS VC.
>
>
> On 09/11/2010 01:25 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Beware of the TCAM size on that box.
>> IIRC it hasn't been able to take full internet routes since 2008
>> because of that limitation.
>>
>> On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins   
>> wrote:
>>
>>> After many days of searching it looks like I found something in the sub
>>> $20k range. The ME-C6524GT-8S appears to do it all.
>>>
>>> On 09/08/2010 04:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>>>
 Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
 switches...
 You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
 RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
 greater you aren't going to find that.

 The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
 should be able to get it for $30-50K.

 Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
 known to do.
 Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
 the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
 reflector to the customer and vice versa.
 Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
 router/route reflector.

 Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
 the most straightforward solution to me.

 On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins
  wrote:


> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> suggestions?
>
> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>
> - Matt
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
-

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Matt Jenkins]

I am thinking its time to use a switch as a switch and a router as a 
router. I am thinking about using this for the MPLS backbone and put in 
actual 7200/7300 routers at locations where full BGP needs to be 
offered. What I haven't yet worked out is whether two routers can 
establish a BGP peering session over a VPLS VC.


On 09/11/2010 01:25 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> Beware of the TCAM size on that box.
> IIRC it hasn't been able to take full internet routes since 2008
> because of that limitation.
>
> On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins  
> wrote:
>
>> After many days of searching it looks like I found something in the sub
>> $20k range. The ME-C6524GT-8S appears to do it all.
>>
>> On 09/08/2010 04:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>>  
>>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
>>> switches...
>>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>>
>>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>>
>>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>>> known to do.
>>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>>> router/route reflector.
>>>
>>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
 I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
 with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
 suggestions?

 For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
 support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
 to customers from this ring of backhauls.

 - Matt


 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


  
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>  
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jon Auer]

Beware of the TCAM size on that box.
IIRC it hasn't been able to take full internet routes since 2008
because of that limitation.

On Saturday, September 11, 2010, Matt Jenkins  wrote:
> After many days of searching it looks like I found something in the sub
> $20k range. The ME-C6524GT-8S appears to do it all.
>
> On 09/08/2010 04:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
>> switches...
>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>
>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>
>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>> known to do.
>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> router/route reflector.
>>
>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>>> suggestions?
>>>
>>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>>
>>> - Matt
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Matt Jenkins]

After many days of searching it looks like I found something in the sub 
$20k range. The ME-C6524GT-8S appears to do it all.

On 09/08/2010 04:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
> switches...
> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
> greater you aren't going to find that.
>
> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>
> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
> known to do.
> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
> router/route reflector.
>
> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
> the most straightforward solution to me.
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  
> wrote:
>
>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>> suggestions?
>>
>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>
>> - Matt
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>  
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[jp]

On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 07:40:07PM -0400, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
> 
> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable  that will do 
> what you are looking for.
> 
> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your 
> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP

Yep. I'd do either some sort of combination of multihop bgp or VLANs to 
the customers needing bgp routing. VLANs really are quite simple at 
least on procurve switches and mikrotiks and junipers. VLANs reduce
broadcast traffic on bridged networks so long as the vlans don't extend 
to places they are not needed.

We have every sited routed with mikrotiks using private ASNs and BGP, 
but we also have procurve switches on most sites' backhauls, so we do 
extend a vlan across multiple sites if we want for a particular purpose, 
and everything else at the sites is routed.

We have stayed away from using switches for L3 because of routing 
limitations and for CALEA; I think it's easier to capture traffic on a 
router than off a switch port, because if your switch has traffic 
duplication you'd still need a router to route the traffic back to the 
collection point.

> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a 
> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used 
> market place.
> 
> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on 
> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k

We're using a Juniper J2350 with upgraded non-juniper RAM for 2 full BGP 
and presently 150+mbps of Internet. Comes with 4 1gbps ethernet ports. 
It was in the $2500 range iirc. There are switching features in it, but 
I haven't tried them. I bought it to do BGP. We can do a real nice MT 
for 1/3 that, but Mikrotik's BGP is not as well documented as 
Cisco/Juniper and we were willing to pay for software that was a little 
more mature/tested. We use MT BGP internally all the time, but that's a 
much smaller BGP network than the Internet of course. The j2350 will 
probably go to 300mbps perfectly fine and we'll upgrade again. There are 
a couple J series models that go higher performance than this and will 
be a lot cheaper than a M series chassis router. If you want up to date 
software and initial tech support, buying new is the way to go 
unfortunately. Unlike Cisco, you do get a reasonable period of tech 
support and software updates without buying a separate service contract. 
The BGP on this has been flawless. Juniper has a tool on their site to 
convert cisco configs to configs for their OS which was quite accurate. 
We upgraded from a Cisco 7507/rsp4 router which was running out of ram 
and steam and sucking too much power.


> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
> 
> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power... 
> Everything else is big and consumes power.
> 
> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches 
> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers 
> located at DataCenters or NOC...
> 
> 
> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for, 
> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am 
> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 
> 
> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> > Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
> > switches...
> > You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
> > RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
> > greater you aren't going to find that.
> >
> > The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
> > should be able to get it for $30-50K.
> >
> > Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
> > known to do.
> > Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
> > the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
> > reflector to the customer and vice versa.
> > Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
> > router/route reflector.
> >
> > Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
> > the most straightforward solution to me.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  
> > wrote:
> >> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
> >> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> >> suggestions?
> >>
> >> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> >> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
> >> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
> >>
> >> - Matt
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> >> http://signup.wispa.org/
> >> 

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Justin Wilson]

If you are looking for an all-in one thing you are almost going to have
to go with a chassis from Cisco or Juniper or someone.  I am a big fan of
the 3 tier design though.  The BGP routers should just be doing edge
routing.  The access and distribution layers should at least be logically
separate.  Surte its more overhead, but it accomplishes a few things.

1.A goof in configuration at one layer does not take down the whole
network.
2.Upgrades are easier and usually cheaper in the long run.  You are
replacing a device(s) which have a semi-dedicated function.  You don¹t have
to have a device that has the horsepower to do 20 things.  Instead it is
doing, say, 10 things.

If you are in need of full BGP routes your traffic must be increasing to
the point a shift in thinking is needed.  Reliability should be #1 and cost
(to a degree) should be secondary.

Justin
-- 
Justin Wilson 
http://www.mtin.net/blog ­ xISP News
http://www.twitter.com/j2sw ­ Follow me on Twitter
Wisp Consulting ­ Tower Climbing ­ Network Support





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jon Auer]

Oh duh. That's line rate at 100M.
The chopped packets must have been a negotiation side effect from
going between 100M and Gig interfaces.
I feel much better about it now, and quite stilly to have missed that.


On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:54 PM, Rubens Kuhl  wrote:
>> Half duplex eth6 to eth7. Eth6 is master-port for eth7.
>> Frame Size, PPS
>> 64, 148810
>
> This is 100M, isn't it ? 1Gbps connection could provide more, I think.
>
>
> Rubens
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Rubens Kuhl]

> Half duplex eth6 to eth7. Eth6 is master-port for eth7.
> Frame Size, PPS
> 64, 148810

This is 100M, isn't it ? 1Gbps connection could provide more, I think.


Rubens



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jon Auer]

For the switch chip in the RB1100, I have some PPS numbers that I got
from testing with a Spirent test set (same gear Cisco, etc use to
determine their PPS numbers.)
Keep in mind I'm still learning it so there may be some problem in my
methodology. (Open SmartWindow, click test. :-) )

Half duplex eth6 to eth7. Eth6 is master-port for eth7.
Frame Size, PPS
64, 148810
128, 84459
256, 45290
512, 23496
1024, 11973
1280, 9615
1518, 8127

That part that makes me go WTF is I'm seeing lower 64 byte packet PPS
in switch mode than Mikrotik publishes for routing throughput.

The 64 byte PPS that I show is the highest that it would go without
getting malformed packets back from the RB1100. Odd things like
packets being chopped in half and emitted as two separate (invalid)
packets.

Running in full duplex mode just made things worse.

Again, I might have a bad test card (eBay :-( ) or be doing it wrong
so if anyone has their own numbers I'd love to see them. I just don't
trust the ones Mikrotik publishes.

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz  wrote:
>
> So here is a nice ref. document from Cisco, pps rating on their routers...
>  Take a look at the PPS rating and the Max Mbps, (you still have to
> consider Memory etc etc.).
>
> http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf
>
> I am not aware of a similar document from Juniper, however one there
> product brochure they do list pps performance number. Keep in mind they
> do packet handling very different from CISCO, as such are able to handle
> traffic better.
>
> Using Google, some sites show RB1000 is capable of doing 199,000 pps
> with Connect track off... check the Cisco Chart... that is about 100Mbps
> of traffic.
>
> I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know would love to
> compare...
>
> Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any comparison
> of what the PowerRouters can handle...
>
> Regards.
>
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
>> Even RB1100 ?
>>
>> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
>>
>> F.
>>
>> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>>
>>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of
>>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>>>
>>> Faisal Imtiaz
>>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>>>
>>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
 vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
 pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)

 :-)


 On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
>
> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
> what you are looking for.
>
> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
>
> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a
> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used
> market place.
>
> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
>
> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
>
> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power...
> Everything else is big and consumes power.
>
> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches
> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
> located at DataCenters or NOC...
>
>
> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for,
> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
>
> Regards.
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
>> switches...
>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>
>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>
>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>> known to do.
>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> router/route reflector.
>>
>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt
>> Jenk

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Francois Menard]

> I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know would love to 
> compare...
> 

Here

http://www.routerboard.com/pdf/routerboard_performance_tests.pdf

RB1100 says 121000 PPS @ 64 KBytes with Conntrack and Firewall (80 mbps) On and 
11 PPS @ 1500Bytes (1.3 gbps)

But again, this is a $400 box... 

F.

> Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any comparison 
> of what the PowerRouters can handle...
> 
> Regards.
> 
> 
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 
> 
> On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
>> Even RB1100 ?
>> 
>> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
>> 
>> F.
>> 
>> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> 
>>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of
>>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>>> 
>>> Faisal Imtiaz
>>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>>> 
>>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
 vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
 pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)
 
 :-)
 
 
 On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
 
> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
> 
> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
> what you are looking for.
> 
> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
> 
> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a
> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used
> market place.
> 
> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
> 
> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
> 
> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power...
> Everything else is big and consumes power.
> 
> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches
> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
> located at DataCenters or NOC...
> 
> 
> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for,
> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
> 
> 
> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
>> switches...
>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>> 
>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>> 
>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>> known to do.
>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> router/route reflector.
>> 
>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt
>> Jenkinsmailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>>
>> wrote:
>>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>>> suggestions?
>>> 
>>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>> 
>>> - Matt
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>> 
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>> 
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>> 
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> 
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Travis Johnson]

 Any of the X86 based systems are going to kill the RB platform we 
have an X86 system moving 500Mbps of traffic (400Mbps x 100Mbps) on a 
daily basis... connection tracking on, queues, NAT rules, etc. and the 
CPU runs at 11% all day long. :)


Travis
Microserv


On 9/8/2010 9:47 PM, RickG wrote:
That might be my next step. Interesting though - a couple years ago, I 
originally had a high end PC (for it's time - Athon 64 Dual-core X2 
4200+ with 4GB of memory) running RouterOS. Swapped it out for a 
RB450G and in my opinion, the little 450G kicked the PC's butt. So now 
I'm skeptical.


On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Jon Auer > wrote:


We've built Supermicro 1U Atom boxes for under $600 to use as DNS
servers.
That was with 2x 2.5 inch hard drives.
You'd probably run RouterOS off of a USB stick instead.
That would save you around $120.

Not much of a point to the RB1000 when a 1U Atom box is cheaper and
can run rings around it in throughput.

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:31 PM, RickG mailto:rgunder...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I love mine but only pushin 20Mbps peak. Then again it was only
$700. How
> much can you build the Atom unit for?
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Travis Johnson mailto:t...@ida.net>> wrote:
>>
>>  The RB1000 is not much of a router when under load. You can
build a 1u
>> ATOM based system for less money that has 4x the horsepower.
>>
>> Travis
>> Microserv
>>
>>
>> On 9/8/2010 9:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> > So here is a nice ref. document from Cisco, pps rating on their
>> > routers...
>> >Take a look at the PPS rating and the Max Mbps, (you still
have to
>> > consider Memory etc etc.).
>> >
>> >
>> >

http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf
>> >
>> > I am not aware of a similar document from Juniper, however
one there
>> > product brochure they do list pps performance number. Keep in
mind they
>> > do packet handling very different from CISCO, as such are
able to handle
>> > traffic better.
>> >
>> > Using Google, some sites show RB1000 is capable of doing
199,000 pps
>> > with Connect track off... check the Cisco Chart... that is
about 100Mbps
>> > of traffic.
>> >
>> > I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know
would love to
>> > compare...
>> >
>> > Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any
comparison
>> > of what the PowerRouters can handle...
>> >
>> > Regards.
>> >
>> >
>> > Faisal Imtiaz
>> > Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>> >
>> >
>> > On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
>> >> Even RB1100 ?
>> >>
>> >> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
>> >>
>> >> F.
>> >>
>> >> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at
300-500meg of
>> >>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>> >>>
>> >>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> >>> Snappy Internet&   Telecom
>> >>>
>> >>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>>  vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
>>  pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an
amazing price)
>> 
>>  :-)
>> 
>> 
>>  On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> 
>> > Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
>> >
>> > There is nothing on the market place that is affordable
that will do
>> > what you are looking for.
>> >
>> > Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig
Switch, pick
>> > your
>> > favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
>> >
>> > For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at
something with
>> > a
>> > G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to
10K on the
>> > used
>> > market place.
>> >
>> > In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like
redundancy...) cost
>> > on
>> > the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
>> >
>> > You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
>> >
>> > Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little
>> > power...
>> > Everything else is big and consumes power.
>> >
>> > Most common, cost efficient network design would be to
use GigE
>> > Switches
>> > in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or
two Routers
>> > located at DataCenters or NOC...
>> >
>> >
>> > If you find some other solution, that can do what you are
looking
>> > for,
>> > please share it with us

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Travis Johnson]

 Last one I built was less than $400. CPU on the RB1000 was over 30% 
compared to 10% on the ATOM unit, exact same traffic.


Travis
Microserv


On 9/8/2010 9:31 PM, RickG wrote:
I love mine but only pushin 20Mbps peak. Then again it was only $700. 
How much can you build the Atom unit for?


On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Travis Johnson > wrote:


 The RB1000 is not much of a router when under load. You can build
a 1u
ATOM based system for less money that has 4x the horsepower.

Travis
Microserv


On 9/8/2010 9:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> So here is a nice ref. document from Cisco, pps rating on their
routers...
>Take a look at the PPS rating and the Max Mbps, (you still
have to
> consider Memory etc etc.).
>
>

http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf
>
> I am not aware of a similar document from Juniper, however one there
> product brochure they do list pps performance number. Keep in
mind they
> do packet handling very different from CISCO, as such are able
to handle
> traffic better.
>
> Using Google, some sites show RB1000 is capable of doing 199,000 pps
> with Connect track off... check the Cisco Chart... that is about
100Mbps
> of traffic.
>
> I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know would
love to
> compare...
>
> Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any
comparison
> of what the PowerRouters can handle...
>
> Regards.
>
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
>> Even RB1100 ?
>>
>> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
>>
>> F.
>>
>> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>>
>>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at
300-500meg of
>>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>>>
>>> Faisal Imtiaz
>>> Snappy Internet&   Telecom
>>>
>>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
 vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
 pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing
price)

 :-)


 On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
>
> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that
will do
> what you are looking for.
>
> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch,
pick your
> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
>
> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at
something with a
> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K
on the used
> market place.
>
> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like
redundancy...) cost on
> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
>
> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
>
> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume
little power...
> Everything else is big and consumes power.
>
> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use
GigE Switches
> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two
Routers
> located at DataCenters or NOC...
>
>
> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are
looking for,
> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too...
what I am
> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
>
> Regards.
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet&   Telecom
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap
Layer 3
>> switches...
>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in
addition to
>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco
6500s or
>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>
>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE
ports. You
>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>
>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like
Cogent has been
>> known to do.
>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3
switch at
>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> router/route reflector.
>>
>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions
seems like
>> the most straightforward solution to

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[RickG]

That might be my next step. Interesting though - a couple years ago, I
originally had a high end PC (for it's time - Athon 64 Dual-core X2 4200+
with 4GB of memory) running RouterOS. Swapped it out for a RB450G and in my
opinion, the little 450G kicked the PC's butt. So now I'm skeptical.

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Jon Auer  wrote:

> We've built Supermicro 1U Atom boxes for under $600 to use as DNS servers.
> That was with 2x 2.5 inch hard drives.
> You'd probably run RouterOS off of a USB stick instead.
> That would save you around $120.
>
> Not much of a point to the RB1000 when a 1U Atom box is cheaper and
> can run rings around it in throughput.
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:31 PM, RickG  wrote:
> > I love mine but only pushin 20Mbps peak. Then again it was only $700. How
> > much can you build the Atom unit for?
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Travis Johnson  wrote:
> >>
> >>  The RB1000 is not much of a router when under load. You can build a 1u
> >> ATOM based system for less money that has 4x the horsepower.
> >>
> >> Travis
> >> Microserv
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/8/2010 9:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> >> > So here is a nice ref. document from Cisco, pps rating on their
> >> > routers...
> >> >Take a look at the PPS rating and the Max Mbps, (you still have to
> >> > consider Memory etc etc.).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf
> >> >
> >> > I am not aware of a similar document from Juniper, however one there
> >> > product brochure they do list pps performance number. Keep in mind
> they
> >> > do packet handling very different from CISCO, as such are able to
> handle
> >> > traffic better.
> >> >
> >> > Using Google, some sites show RB1000 is capable of doing 199,000 pps
> >> > with Connect track off... check the Cisco Chart... that is about
> 100Mbps
> >> > of traffic.
> >> >
> >> > I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know would love to
> >> > compare...
> >> >
> >> > Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any
> comparison
> >> > of what the PowerRouters can handle...
> >> >
> >> > Regards.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Faisal Imtiaz
> >> > Snappy Internet&  Telecom
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
> >> >> Even RB1100 ?
> >> >>
> >> >> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
> >> >>
> >> >> F.
> >> >>
> >> >> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg
> of
> >> >>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Faisal Imtiaz
> >> >>> Snappy Internet&   Telecom
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
> >>  vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
> >>  pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)
> >> 
> >>  :-)
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
> >> >
> >> > There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will
> do
> >> > what you are looking for.
> >> >
> >> > Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick
> >> > your
> >> > favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
> >> >
> >> > For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something
> with
> >> > a
> >> > G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on
> the
> >> > used
> >> > market place.
> >> >
> >> > In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost
> >> > on
> >> > the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
> >> >
> >> > You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
> >> >
> >> > Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little
> >> > power...
> >> > Everything else is big and consumes power.
> >> >
> >> > Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE
> >> > Switches
> >> > in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two
> Routers
> >> > located at DataCenters or NOC...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking
> >> > for,
> >> > please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I
> am
> >> > sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
> >> >
> >> > Regards.
> >> >
> >> > Faisal Imtiaz
> >> > Snappy Internet&   Telecom
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> >> >> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer
> 3
> >> >> switches...
> >> >> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition
> to
> >> >> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
> >> >> greater you aren't going to find that.
> >> >>
> >> >> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U a

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jon Auer]

We've built Supermicro 1U Atom boxes for under $600 to use as DNS servers.
That was with 2x 2.5 inch hard drives.
You'd probably run RouterOS off of a USB stick instead.
That would save you around $120.

Not much of a point to the RB1000 when a 1U Atom box is cheaper and
can run rings around it in throughput.

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:31 PM, RickG  wrote:
> I love mine but only pushin 20Mbps peak. Then again it was only $700. How
> much can you build the Atom unit for?
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Travis Johnson  wrote:
>>
>>  The RB1000 is not much of a router when under load. You can build a 1u
>> ATOM based system for less money that has 4x the horsepower.
>>
>> Travis
>> Microserv
>>
>>
>> On 9/8/2010 9:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> > So here is a nice ref. document from Cisco, pps rating on their
>> > routers...
>> >    Take a look at the PPS rating and the Max Mbps, (you still have to
>> > consider Memory etc etc.).
>> >
>> >
>> > http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf
>> >
>> > I am not aware of a similar document from Juniper, however one there
>> > product brochure they do list pps performance number. Keep in mind they
>> > do packet handling very different from CISCO, as such are able to handle
>> > traffic better.
>> >
>> > Using Google, some sites show RB1000 is capable of doing 199,000 pps
>> > with Connect track off... check the Cisco Chart... that is about 100Mbps
>> > of traffic.
>> >
>> > I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know would love to
>> > compare...
>> >
>> > Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any comparison
>> > of what the PowerRouters can handle...
>> >
>> > Regards.
>> >
>> >
>> > Faisal Imtiaz
>> > Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>> >
>> >
>> > On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
>> >> Even RB1100 ?
>> >>
>> >> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
>> >>
>> >> F.
>> >>
>> >> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of
>> >>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>> >>>
>> >>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> >>> Snappy Internet&   Telecom
>> >>>
>> >>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>>  vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
>>  pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)
>> 
>>  :-)
>> 
>> 
>>  On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> 
>> > Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
>> >
>> > There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
>> > what you are looking for.
>> >
>> > Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick
>> > your
>> > favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
>> >
>> > For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with
>> > a
>> > G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the
>> > used
>> > market place.
>> >
>> > In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost
>> > on
>> > the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
>> >
>> > You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
>> >
>> > Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little
>> > power...
>> > Everything else is big and consumes power.
>> >
>> > Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE
>> > Switches
>> > in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
>> > located at DataCenters or NOC...
>> >
>> >
>> > If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking
>> > for,
>> > please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
>> > sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
>> >
>> > Regards.
>> >
>> > Faisal Imtiaz
>> > Snappy Internet&   Telecom
>> >
>> >
>> > On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> >> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
>> >> switches...
>> >> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>> >> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>> >> greater you aren't going to find that.
>> >>
>> >> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports.
>> >> You
>> >> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>> >>
>> >> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has
>> >> been
>> >> known to do.
>> >> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch
>> >> at
>> >> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> >> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> >> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> >> router/route reflector.
>> >>
>> >> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems lik

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Rubens Kuhl]

If you have a ring, don't do layer 3. Use L2 switch that have some
form of rapid recovery that isn't spanning-tree based, and have 2
strong Layer 3 routers connected to it.

An usual combination is Extreme pizza boxes with EAPS ring-protection,
2 Juniper M7i routers with VRRP, but many others will work.


Rubens


On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  wrote:
> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> suggestions?
>
> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>
> - Matt
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[RickG]

I love mine but only pushin 20Mbps peak. Then again it was only $700. How
much can you build the Atom unit for?

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Travis Johnson  wrote:

>  The RB1000 is not much of a router when under load. You can build a 1u
> ATOM based system for less money that has 4x the horsepower.
>
> Travis
> Microserv
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 9:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> > So here is a nice ref. document from Cisco, pps rating on their
> routers...
> >Take a look at the PPS rating and the Max Mbps, (you still have to
> > consider Memory etc etc.).
> >
> >
> http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf
> >
> > I am not aware of a similar document from Juniper, however one there
> > product brochure they do list pps performance number. Keep in mind they
> > do packet handling very different from CISCO, as such are able to handle
> > traffic better.
> >
> > Using Google, some sites show RB1000 is capable of doing 199,000 pps
> > with Connect track off... check the Cisco Chart... that is about 100Mbps
> > of traffic.
> >
> > I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know would love to
> > compare...
> >
> > Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any comparison
> > of what the PowerRouters can handle...
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> >
> > Faisal Imtiaz
> > Snappy Internet&  Telecom
> >
> >
> > On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
> >> Even RB1100 ?
> >>
> >> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
> >>
> >> F.
> >>
> >> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> >>
> >>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of
> >>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
> >>>
> >>> Faisal Imtiaz
> >>> Snappy Internet&   Telecom
> >>>
> >>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>  vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
>  pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)
> 
>  :-)
> 
> 
>  On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> 
> > Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
> >
> > There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
> > what you are looking for.
> >
> > Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
> > favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
> >
> > For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with
> a
> > G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the
> used
> > market place.
> >
> > In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
> > the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
> >
> > You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
> >
> > Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little
> power...
> > Everything else is big and consumes power.
> >
> > Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE
> Switches
> > in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
> > located at DataCenters or NOC...
> >
> >
> > If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking
> for,
> > please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
> > sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> > Faisal Imtiaz
> > Snappy Internet&   Telecom
> >
> >
> > On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> >> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
> >> switches...
> >> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
> >> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
> >> greater you aren't going to find that.
> >>
> >> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports.
> You
> >> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
> >>
> >> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has
> been
> >> known to do.
> >> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch
> at
> >> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
> >> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
> >> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
> >> router/route reflector.
> >>
> >> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
> >> the most straightforward solution to me.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt
> >> Jenkinsmailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T
> ports
> >>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> >>> suggestions?
> >>>
> >>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> >>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP
> connections
> >>> to customers from th

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Travis Johnson]

  The RB1000 is not much of a router when under load. You can build a 1u 
ATOM based system for less money that has 4x the horsepower.

Travis
Microserv


On 9/8/2010 9:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> So here is a nice ref. document from Cisco, pps rating on their routers...
>Take a look at the PPS rating and the Max Mbps, (you still have to
> consider Memory etc etc.).
>
> http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf
>
> I am not aware of a similar document from Juniper, however one there
> product brochure they do list pps performance number. Keep in mind they
> do packet handling very different from CISCO, as such are able to handle
> traffic better.
>
> Using Google, some sites show RB1000 is capable of doing 199,000 pps
> with Connect track off... check the Cisco Chart... that is about 100Mbps
> of traffic.
>
> I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know would love to
> compare...
>
> Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any comparison
> of what the PowerRouters can handle...
>
> Regards.
>
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
>> Even RB1100 ?
>>
>> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
>>
>> F.
>>
>> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>>
>>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of
>>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>>>
>>> Faisal Imtiaz
>>> Snappy Internet&   Telecom
>>>
>>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
 vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
 pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)

 :-)


 On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
>
> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
> what you are looking for.
>
> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
>
> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a
> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used
> market place.
>
> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
>
> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
>
> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power...
> Everything else is big and consumes power.
>
> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches
> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
> located at DataCenters or NOC...
>
>
> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for,
> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
>
> Regards.
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet&   Telecom
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
>> switches...
>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>
>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>
>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>> known to do.
>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> router/route reflector.
>>
>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt
>> Jenkinsmailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>>
>> wrote:
>>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>>> suggestions?
>>>
>>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>>
>>> - Matt
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http:

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Faisal Imtiaz]

So here is a nice ref. document from Cisco, pps rating on their routers...
  Take a look at the PPS rating and the Max Mbps, (you still have to 
consider Memory etc etc.).

http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf

I am not aware of a similar document from Juniper, however one there 
product brochure they do list pps performance number. Keep in mind they 
do packet handling very different from CISCO, as such are able to handle 
traffic better.

Using Google, some sites show RB1000 is capable of doing 199,000 pps 
with Connect track off... check the Cisco Chart... that is about 100Mbps 
of traffic.

I cannot find the PPS rating on RB1100... so if you know would love to 
compare...

Also, I would like to ask Dennis to let us know if he has any comparison 
of what the PowerRouters can handle...

Regards.


Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom


On 9/8/2010 9:56 PM, Francois Menard wrote:
> Even RB1100 ?
>
> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
>
> F.
>
> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>
>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of
>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>>
>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>>> vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
>>> pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>>>
 Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...

 There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
 what you are looking for.

 Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
 favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP

 For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a
 G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used
 market place.

 In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
 the secondary markets about $8 to $10k

 You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000

 Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power...
 Everything else is big and consumes power.

 Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches
 in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
 located at DataCenters or NOC...


 If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for,
 please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
 sharing above with you is what we have found so far.

 Regards.

 Faisal Imtiaz
 Snappy Internet&  Telecom


 On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
> switches...
> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
> greater you aren't going to find that.
>
> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>
> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
> known to do.
> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
> router/route reflector.
>
> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
> the most straightforward solution to me.
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt
> Jenkinsmailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>>
> wrote:
>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>> suggestions?
>>
>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>
>> - Matt
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jon Auer]

What kind of PPS are you seeing on that setup?

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Glenn Kelley  wrote:
> Is this going on a stick on in a building.
> We have an opensource Vyatta running circles around the old Vax 7200 stuff
> GigE even is not an issue - but used a Dell R300 with 8GB ram to do it.
> Still much cheaper than most anything else on the planet for the same
> config
>
> On Sep 8, 2010, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>
> e sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of
> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Glenn Kelley]

Is this going on a stick on in a building.

We have an opensource Vyatta running circles around the old Vax 7200 stuff 

GigE even is not an issue - but used a Dell R300 with 8GB ram to do it. 
Still much cheaper than most anything else on the planet for the same config 


On Sep 8, 2010, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

> e sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of 
> traffic...  100meg no problem.
> 
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom

_
Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com 
  Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Rubens Kuhl]

An RB1000 with an external switch will handle more traffic than RB1100.


Rubens


On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Francois Menard  wrote:
> Even RB1100 ?
>
> That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...
>
> F.
>
> On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>
>> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of
>> traffic...  100meg no problem.
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>>
>> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>>> vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
>>> pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>>>
 Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...

 There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
 what you are looking for.

 Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
 favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP

 For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a
 G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used
 market place.

 In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
 the secondary markets about $8 to $10k

 You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000

 Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power...
 Everything else is big and consumes power.

 Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches
 in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
 located at DataCenters or NOC...


 If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for,
 please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
 sharing above with you is what we have found so far.

 Regards.

 Faisal Imtiaz
 Snappy Internet & Telecom


 On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
> switches...
> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
> greater you aren't going to find that.
>
> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>
> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
> known to do.
> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
> router/route reflector.
>
> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
> the most straightforward solution to me.
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt
> Jenkinsmailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>>
> wrote:
>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>> suggestions?
>>
>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>
>> - Matt
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>


 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>> _
>

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Francois Menard]

Even RB1100 ?

That would be my choice. 399$ for 13 GigE ports...

F.

On 2010-09-08, at 8:53 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

> Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of 
> traffic...  100meg no problem.
> 
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 
> On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>> vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
>> pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)
>> 
>> :-)
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> 
>>> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
>>> 
>>> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
>>> what you are looking for.
>>> 
>>> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
>>> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
>>> 
>>> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a
>>> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used
>>> market place.
>>> 
>>> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
>>> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
>>> 
>>> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
>>> 
>>> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power...
>>> Everything else is big and consumes power.
>>> 
>>> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches
>>> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
>>> located at DataCenters or NOC...
>>> 
>>> 
>>> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for,
>>> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
>>> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
>>> 
>>> Regards.
>>> 
>>> Faisal Imtiaz
>>> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
 Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
 switches...
 You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
 RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
 greater you aren't going to find that.
 
 The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
 should be able to get it for $30-50K.
 
 Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
 known to do.
 Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
 the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
 reflector to the customer and vice versa.
 Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
 router/route reflector.
 
 Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
 the most straightforward solution to me.
 
 On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt
 Jenkinsmailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>>
 wrote:
> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> suggestions?
> 
> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
> 
> - Matt
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>> 
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>> 
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>> _
>> *Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com *
>> Email: gl...@hostmedic.com 
>> Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Faisal Imtiaz]

Non of the sub $1000 appliances will cut the mustard at 300-500meg of 
traffic...  100meg no problem.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom

On 9/8/2010 8:44 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
> vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work -
> pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price)
>
> :-)
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>
>> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
>>
>> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable that will do
>> what you are looking for.
>>
>> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
>> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
>>
>> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a
>> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used
>> market place.
>>
>> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
>> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
>>
>> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
>>
>> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power...
>> Everything else is big and consumes power.
>>
>> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches
>> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
>> located at DataCenters or NOC...
>>
>>
>> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for,
>> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
>> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>>
>>
>> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3
>>> switches...
>>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>>
>>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>>
>>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>>> known to do.
>>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>>> router/route reflector.
>>>
>>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt
>>> Jenkinsmailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>>
>>> wrote:
 I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
 with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
 suggestions?

 For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
 support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
 to customers from this ring of backhauls.

 - Matt


 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> _
> *Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com *
> Email: gl...@hostmedic.com 
> Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wi

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Glenn Kelley]

vyatta has a $799 routing appliance that will work - 
pfsense - on hardware will do it for free - (what an amazing price) 

:-)


On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
> 
> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable  that will do 
> what you are looking for.
> 
> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your 
> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
> 
> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a 
> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used 
> market place.
> 
> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on 
> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
> 
> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
> 
> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power... 
> Everything else is big and consumes power.
> 
> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches 
> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers 
> located at DataCenters or NOC...
> 
> 
> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for, 
> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am 
> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 
> 
> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
>> switches...
>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>> 
>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>> 
>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>> known to do.
>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> router/route reflector.
>> 
>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  
>> wrote:
>>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>>> suggestions?
>>> 
>>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>> 
>>> - Matt
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>> 
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>> 
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>> 
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> 
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

_
Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com 
  Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jon Auer]

A good starting point would be if Mikrotik would lay off the "Linux on
underpowered embedded hardware" shtick for a dev cycle or two and make
a board using the Broadcom BMC56330 chipset for Layer3
switching+MPLS/VPLS.
If they can't port their software they could bolt on a existing OEM
router OS like ZebOS...

It feels like we are on the cusp of a routing revolution here. Chips
for Layer3 switching seem to be far more commoditized than they were
in the past where someone like Cisco would have to roll a ASIC. We
just need a vendor to glue the pieces together an sell us something...

The RB1100 is especially disappointing when you consider that they
could have used a different switchchip and had 70Gbps of IPv4/v6
hardware routing, ACL processing, MPLS, etc and jacked the price up by
a few K.


On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz  wrote:
> Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...
>
> There is nothing on the market place that is affordable  that will do
> what you are looking for.
>
> Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your
> favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP
>
> For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a
> G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used
> market place.
>
> In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on
> the secondary markets about $8 to $10k
>
> You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000
>
> Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power...
> Everything else is big and consumes power.
>
> Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches
> in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers
> located at DataCenters or NOC...
>
>
> If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for,
> please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am
> sharing above with you is what we have found so far.
>
> Regards.
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
>> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
>> switches...
>> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
>> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
>> greater you aren't going to find that.
>>
>> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
>> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>>
>> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
>> known to do.
>> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
>> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
>> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
>> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
>> router/route reflector.
>>
>> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
>> the most straightforward solution to me.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  
>> wrote:
>>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>>> suggestions?
>>>
>>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>>
>>> - Matt
>>>
>>>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Faisal Imtiaz]

Welcome to the Mid-range of traffic handling...

There is nothing on the market place that is affordable  that will do 
what you are looking for.

Best thing you can do is deploy two devices.. a Gig Switch, pick your 
favorite vendor... and a Core Router for BGP

For Core Router in the Cisco world you are looking at something with a 
G1 or G2 engine ... (7206vxr or small 7301) range $5k to 10K on the used 
market place.

In Juniper Land... M10i or an M20 (if you like redundancy...) cost on 
the secondary markets about $8 to $10k

You could use a Mikrotik Power Router.. cost $ 2500 to $5000

Only the Cisco 7301 and Mikrotik are small and consume little power... 
Everything else is big and consumes power.

Most common, cost efficient network design would be to use GigE Switches 
in a ring or your favorite network topology, with one or two Routers 
located at DataCenters or NOC...


If you find some other solution, that can do what you are looking for, 
please share it with us, cause we have been looking too... what I am 
sharing above with you is what we have found so far.

Regards.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom


On 9/8/2010 7:16 PM, Jon Auer wrote:
> Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 
> switches...
> You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
> RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
> greater you aren't going to find that.
>
> The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
> should be able to get it for $30-50K.
>
> Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
> known to do.
> Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
> the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
> reflector to the customer and vice versa.
> Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
> router/route reflector.
>
> Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
> the most straightforward solution to me.
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  
> wrote:
>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>> suggestions?
>>
>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>
>> - Matt
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jon Auer]

Needing full BGP routes takes you out of the realm of cheap Layer 3 switches...
You need to worry about TCAM (hardware route memory) in addition to
RAM on Layer 3 switches and apart from decked out Cisco 6500s or
greater you aren't going to find that.

The Juniper MX80 should work. It is 2U and can have 48 GigE ports. You
should be able to get it for $30-50K.

Alternatively you could try a multihop BGP setup like Cogent has been
known to do.
Setup one BGP session between the customer and your Layer 3 switch at
the tower. This carriers a route for your border router/route
reflector to the customer and vice versa.
Then setup a BGP session between the customer and your border
router/route reflector.

Or you could drag MPLS into it but 2 simple BGP sessions seems like
the most straightforward solution to me.

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Matt Jenkins  wrote:
> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> suggestions?
>
> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>
> - Matt
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Jeremy Parr]

On 8 September 2010 17:31, Matt Jenkins  wrote:

> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> suggestions?
>
> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>

You don't necessarily need the switch to run BGP. You can have your custom
add a static route or two to reach a BGP peer on your network. This is
actually common practice, rather than peering directly with the providers
customer facing access switch.



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[David E. Smith]

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 17:09, Matt Jenkins wrote:

> I have 8+ backhauls at some sites. I want to move from a bridged network
> to a routed network using MPLS. This would simplify handing off business
> ethernet connections. It would also reduce all of the broadcast traffic
> going across the backhauls and reduce the VLAN management required. But
> I cant find a router that has more than about 6 1000base-T ports so I
> was thinking a Layer 3 switch that has 1GB of ram might be easier to
> find. The switch would also have the backplane to handle the traffic.
>
>
If you're going that route, it might be easier just to MPLS the BGP
customers all the way back to your NOC (or another central point a couple
steps removed from the towers), and do the BGP peering there. To the
customer, it still should look like one Ethernet segment so they don't have
to do multihop. Maybe still have a couple of these locations and multi-home
their BGP sessions. They'll still get all the benefits of your fancy
network, and suitable hardware will probably be a lot less expensive if you
only have to buy a couple big routers for your BGP sessions instead of
fitting it all into a large expensive switch.

Anyway, I can't find anything in the low end of the Cisco line that offers
that much RAM. No Catalyst gear, for instance. You'll likely need to look a
bit higher up in the "router" space, honestly. Probably not "Cisco CRS"
high, but this could be a fairly pricey project, which is why I'm trying to
think of alternatives.

David Smith
MVN.net



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Glenn Kelley]

You could simply build a pfsense and/or a vyatta router with an alix board and 
a few nics - 
Let me do a few searches - and will let you know what I find 

On Sep 8, 2010, at 6:21 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:

> Cisco and Juniper are both failing to have a reasonable product. 
> $60,000+ is a bit too expensive.
> 
> On 09/08/2010 03:20 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>   It also adds points of failure, increases power consumption, etc.
>> 
>> I'm sure Cisco or Juniper could handle it, but I'm not sure whom else.
>> Maybe a PowerRouter?
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 9/8/2010 5:17 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
>> 
>>> Yeah that is an option, but increases the management overhead which is
>>> one of the primary things I am trying to reduce.
>>> 
>>> On 09/08/2010 03:13 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>>> 
 Another option is a simple router - that does vlans -
 vlan to the switch and go from there :-)
 
 
 On Sep 8, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
 
 
> I have 8+ backhauls at some sites. I want to move from a bridged network
> to a routed network using MPLS. This would simplify handing off business
> ethernet connections. It would also reduce all of the broadcast traffic
> going across the backhauls and reduce the VLAN management required. But
> I cant find a router that has more than about 6 1000base-T ports so I
> was thinking a Layer 3 switch that has 1GB of ram might be easier to
> find. The switch would also have the backplane to handle the traffic.
> 
> On 09/08/2010 02:36 PM, David E. Smith wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 16:31, Matt Jenkins
>> mailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>
>> >   wrote:
>> 
>> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T
>> ports
>> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>> suggestions?
>> 
>> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP
>> connections
>> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>> 
>> 
>> Seems like an interesting combination of things there. If I may ask,
>> why don't you leave the ring stuff and switching to the switches, and
>> routing stuff like BGP to separate routers? It'll probably make things
>> a lot easier to set up, and you'll be free to get the best switches
>> and the best routers for your needs instead of trying to find
>> something that's only so-so at either task.
>> 
>> (Not intended as criticism, I'm actually kinda curious about this
>> network layout.)
>> 
>> David Smith
>> MVN.net
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>> 
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> 
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
 _
 *Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com *
 Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
 Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
 
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>> 
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>> 
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wirel

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Matt Jenkins]

Cisco and Juniper are both failing to have a reasonable product. 
$60,000+ is a bit too expensive.

On 09/08/2010 03:20 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>It also adds points of failure, increases power consumption, etc.
>
> I'm sure Cisco or Juniper could handle it, but I'm not sure whom else.
> Maybe a PowerRouter?
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> On 9/8/2010 5:17 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
>
>> Yeah that is an option, but increases the management overhead which is
>> one of the primary things I am trying to reduce.
>>
>> On 09/08/2010 03:13 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>>  
>>> Another option is a simple router - that does vlans -
>>> vlan to the switch and go from there :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 8, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
>>>
>>>
 I have 8+ backhauls at some sites. I want to move from a bridged network
 to a routed network using MPLS. This would simplify handing off business
 ethernet connections. It would also reduce all of the broadcast traffic
 going across the backhauls and reduce the VLAN management required. But
 I cant find a router that has more than about 6 1000base-T ports so I
 was thinking a Layer 3 switch that has 1GB of ram might be easier to
 find. The switch would also have the backplane to handle the traffic.

 On 09/08/2010 02:36 PM, David E. Smith wrote:
  
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 16:31, Matt Jenkins
> mailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>
> >   wrote:
>
>  I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T
>  ports
>  with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>  suggestions?
>
>  For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>  support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP
>  connections
>  to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>
>
> Seems like an interesting combination of things there. If I may ask,
> why don't you leave the ring stuff and switching to the switches, and
> routing stuff like BGP to separate routers? It'll probably make things
> a lot easier to set up, and you'll be free to get the best switches
> and the best routers for your needs instead of trying to find
> something that's only so-so at either task.
>
> (Not intended as criticism, I'm actually kinda curious about this
> network layout.)
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  
>>> _
>>> *Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com *
>>> Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
>>> Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>  
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Mike Hammett]

  It also adds points of failure, increases power consumption, etc.

I'm sure Cisco or Juniper could handle it, but I'm not sure whom else.  
Maybe a PowerRouter?

-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 9/8/2010 5:17 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
> Yeah that is an option, but increases the management overhead which is
> one of the primary things I am trying to reduce.
>
> On 09/08/2010 03:13 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>> Another option is a simple router - that does vlans -
>> vlan to the switch and go from there :-)
>>
>>
>> On Sep 8, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
>>
>>> I have 8+ backhauls at some sites. I want to move from a bridged network
>>> to a routed network using MPLS. This would simplify handing off business
>>> ethernet connections. It would also reduce all of the broadcast traffic
>>> going across the backhauls and reduce the VLAN management required. But
>>> I cant find a router that has more than about 6 1000base-T ports so I
>>> was thinking a Layer 3 switch that has 1GB of ram might be easier to
>>> find. The switch would also have the backplane to handle the traffic.
>>>
>>> On 09/08/2010 02:36 PM, David E. Smith wrote:

 On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 16:31, Matt Jenkins
 mailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>
 >  wrote:

 I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T
 ports
 with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
 suggestions?

 For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
 support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP
 connections
 to customers from this ring of backhauls.


 Seems like an interesting combination of things there. If I may ask,
 why don't you leave the ring stuff and switching to the switches, and
 routing stuff like BGP to separate routers? It'll probably make things
 a lot easier to set up, and you'll be free to get the best switches
 and the best routers for your needs instead of trying to find
 something that's only so-so at either task.

 (Not intended as criticism, I'm actually kinda curious about this
 network layout.)

 David Smith
 MVN.net




 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> _
>> *Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com *
>> Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
>> Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Matt Jenkins]

Yeah that is an option, but increases the management overhead which is 
one of the primary things I am trying to reduce.

On 09/08/2010 03:13 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:
> Another option is a simple router - that does vlans -
> vlan to the switch and go from there :-)
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
>
>> I have 8+ backhauls at some sites. I want to move from a bridged network
>> to a routed network using MPLS. This would simplify handing off business
>> ethernet connections. It would also reduce all of the broadcast traffic
>> going across the backhauls and reduce the VLAN management required. But
>> I cant find a router that has more than about 6 1000base-T ports so I
>> was thinking a Layer 3 switch that has 1GB of ram might be easier to
>> find. The switch would also have the backplane to handle the traffic.
>>
>> On 09/08/2010 02:36 PM, David E. Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 16:31, Matt Jenkins 
>>> mailto:m...@smarterbroadband.net>
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T
>>>ports
>>>with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>>>suggestions?
>>>
>>>For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>>>support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP
>>>connections
>>>to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>>>
>>>
>>> Seems like an interesting combination of things there. If I may ask,
>>> why don't you leave the ring stuff and switching to the switches, and
>>> routing stuff like BGP to separate routers? It'll probably make things
>>> a lot easier to set up, and you'll be free to get the best switches
>>> and the best routers for your needs instead of trying to find
>>> something that's only so-so at either task.
>>>
>>> (Not intended as criticism, I'm actually kinda curious about this
>>> network layout.)
>>>
>>> David Smith
>>> MVN.net 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> _
> *Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com *
> Email: gl...@hostmedic.com 
> Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Glenn Kelley]

Another option is a simple router - that does vlans - 
vlan to the switch and go from there :-)


On Sep 8, 2010, at 6:09 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:

> I have 8+ backhauls at some sites. I want to move from a bridged network 
> to a routed network using MPLS. This would simplify handing off business 
> ethernet connections. It would also reduce all of the broadcast traffic 
> going across the backhauls and reduce the VLAN management required. But 
> I cant find a router that has more than about 6 1000base-T ports so I 
> was thinking a Layer 3 switch that has 1GB of ram might be easier to 
> find. The switch would also have the backplane to handle the traffic.
> 
> On 09/08/2010 02:36 PM, David E. Smith wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 16:31, Matt Jenkins > > wrote:
>> 
>>I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T
>>ports
>>with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
>>suggestions?
>> 
>>For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
>>support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP
>>connections
>>to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>> 
>> 
>> Seems like an interesting combination of things there. If I may ask, 
>> why don't you leave the ring stuff and switching to the switches, and 
>> routing stuff like BGP to separate routers? It'll probably make things 
>> a lot easier to set up, and you'll be free to get the best switches 
>> and the best routers for your needs instead of trying to find 
>> something that's only so-so at either task.
>> 
>> (Not intended as criticism, I'm actually kinda curious about this 
>> network layout.)
>> 
>> David Smith
>> MVN.net
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>> 
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> 
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

_
Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com 
  Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Matt Jenkins]

I have 8+ backhauls at some sites. I want to move from a bridged network 
to a routed network using MPLS. This would simplify handing off business 
ethernet connections. It would also reduce all of the broadcast traffic 
going across the backhauls and reduce the VLAN management required. But 
I cant find a router that has more than about 6 1000base-T ports so I 
was thinking a Layer 3 switch that has 1GB of ram might be easier to 
find. The switch would also have the backplane to handle the traffic.

On 09/08/2010 02:36 PM, David E. Smith wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 16:31, Matt Jenkins  > wrote:
>
> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T
> ports
> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> suggestions?
>
> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP
> connections
> to customers from this ring of backhauls.
>
>
> Seems like an interesting combination of things there. If I may ask, 
> why don't you leave the ring stuff and switching to the switches, and 
> routing stuff like BGP to separate routers? It'll probably make things 
> a lot easier to set up, and you'll be free to get the best switches 
> and the best routers for your needs instead of trying to find 
> something that's only so-so at either task.
>
> (Not intended as criticism, I'm actually kinda curious about this 
> network layout.)
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Mike Hammett]

 On the bigger equipment, the switches are much more affordable than 
the routers, but the routers scale up much higher.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 9/8/2010 4:36 PM, David E. Smith wrote:



On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 16:31, Matt Jenkins > wrote:


I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T
ports
with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
suggestions?

For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP
connections
to customers from this ring of backhauls.


Seems like an interesting combination of things there. If I may ask, 
why don't you leave the ring stuff and switching to the switches, and 
routing stuff like BGP to separate routers? It'll probably make things 
a lot easier to set up, and you'll be free to get the best switches 
and the best routers for your needs instead of trying to find 
something that's only so-so at either task.


(Not intended as criticism, I'm actually kinda curious about this 
network layout.)


David Smith
MVN.net





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[David E. Smith]

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 16:31, Matt Jenkins wrote:

> I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports
> with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any
> suggestions?
>
> For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to
> support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections
> to customers from this ring of backhauls.


Seems like an interesting combination of things there. If I may ask, why
don't you leave the ring stuff and switching to the switches, and routing
stuff like BGP to separate routers? It'll probably make things a lot easier
to set up, and you'll be free to get the best switches and the best routers
for your needs instead of trying to find something that's only so-so at
either task.

(Not intended as criticism, I'm actually kinda curious about this network
layout.)

David Smith
MVN.net



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] OT: Looking for Layer 3 Switch with BGP?

[Matt Jenkins]

I am trying to find a Layer 3 switch that has 24 or 48 1000 base-T ports 
with enough RAM to handle Full BGP Internet Routes. Anyone have any 
suggestions?

For those who wonder why I am upgrading all of my backhauls to 
support ~300mbps. In addition I need to be able to offer BGP connections 
to customers from this ring of backhauls.

- Matt



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/