]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 12:12 AM
To: Adam Rothschild
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Cisco 7200 VXR with NPE-400 (was RE: The market must be coming
back)
Adam:
[...] Sort of like buying a GbE interface for a 7200 (It only get's
10% throughput... Why waste the money, just buy FE!).
How
Based on our testing it looks like it all has to do with packet size. With
small packets the throughput is very low. With what Cisco calls an
internet mix of packet sizes throughput is much better. When doing max
MTU packets, the throughput is of course the best.
The other thing I've
first.
-Original Message-
From: Ralph Doncaster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 22. mája 2002 16:15
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Cisco 7200 VXR with NPE-400 (was RE: The market
must be coming back)
Based on our testing it looks like it all has
How long has this company been in business?
Are they using open standards?
Do they have knowledgeable tech support?
..and so on.
Good startups make great partners, and a great partner will have crisp and compelling
answers to these questions that CFO-types like, even before you start to
Chance:
that want 4 X 10 GbE on each module (8 slot chassis). I
expect this will be a perfect 40G throughput since I've never
seen us do anything less than perfect (been working here
since August).
Oh phuleeese Stop drinking your own Kool-Aid(tm). To honestly
suggest that
Richard:
And if^H^Hwhen you run into a really fun issue, don't even think
about calling Foundry TAC after hours, all you'll get is someone's house
with their screaming kids in the background.
Our TAC is 24/7 and has been 24/7 for years. I work in the Support Center
for Japan. We have not
On 2002-05-21-01:12:25, Gary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I used a Cisco 7200 VXR with NPE-400. I used two different 7200's
with the exact same results. Bidirectional throughput on 1GbE is a
fraction above 10%. Unidirectional is a bit better (23%). Singl
line ACL drops it to 8% (permit ip
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 04:55:51PM +0900, Gary wrote:
Richard:
And if^H^Hwhen you run into a really fun issue, don't even think
about calling Foundry TAC after hours, all you'll get is someone's house
with their screaming kids in the background.
Our TAC is 24/7 and has been 24/7 for
21, 2002 12:37 AM
To: Richard A Steenbergen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: The market must be coming back
Richard:
Personally I would say that Foundry does EVERYTHING less than perfect.
Nearly everyone I'm aware of (including myself) who has had to
misfortune to try and use their devices
: The market must be
coming back
On Tue, 21 May 2002, Christopher J. Wolff wrote:
So, regardless of whether the hardware is the fastest thing on the
block, pushing 10 nanobits at a megaflop, you can look like a fool if
you don't consider the business repercussions of the vendor you
choose
Everyone's so busy there hasn't been a peep on here in weeks.
Regards,
Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO
Broadband Laboratories
http://www.bblabs.com
Actually, there has been a lot of peeping!
On Mon, 20 May 2002, Christopher
J. Wolff wrote:
Everyone's so busy there hasn't been a peep on here in weeks.
Regards,
Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO
Broadband Laboratories
http://www.bblabs.com
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 05:27:20PM -0700, Christopher J. Wolff wrote:
Everyone's so busy there hasn't been a peep on here in weeks.
Regards,
Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO
Nah, we're just not allowed to post here anymore.
Inside joke with myself, please ignore ;
-dre
Chris:
I've been thinking about leasing some dark fiber and running one of the
new 10gigE blades for the Cat 6500 chassis.
Be careful here. Last I tested (at one of our channels that also resells
Cisco) is that the 10GbE on the Catalyst 6500 hasn't broken 4G throughput
yet. Sort of like
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Gary
that want 4 X 10 GbE on each module (8 slot chassis). I
expect this will be a perfect 40G throughput since I've never
seen us do anything less than perfect (been working here
since
On 2002-05-21-00:14:30, Gary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] Sort of like buying a GbE interface for a 7200 (It only get's
10% throughput... Why waste the money, just buy FE!).
How did the Foundry test lab arrive at those figures, and what
substances were consumed at the time?
I'd say 300+
On Mon, 20 May 2002, Christopher J. Wolff wrote:
Everyone's so busy there hasn't been a peep on here in weeks.
I don't know.. it's been fairly chatty on here.
At times more so and more often on a single thread than usual.
One report claims that the job boards have exploded in parts of the
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 10:33:32PM -0600, Chance Whaley wrote:
Oh phuleeese Stop drinking your own Kool-Aid(tm). To honestly
suggest that Foundry, or any other vendor for that matter, never does
'anything less than perfect' is nothing less than idiotic. If Foundry
does things so
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 07:27:35AM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
I have personally seen a 7200 with PXF-chip and two PA-GE do NAT at
300megabit with a few (10-15) ftp streams going thru it. With more random
load it wouldn't go much above 100 meg, though.
I have done 400Mbit with an
Jason,
Are you espousing Juniper or Foundry for 10ge?
-Original Message-
From: Jason LeBlanc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 9:35 PM
To: Gary; Christopher J. Wolff
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: The market must be coming back
Juniper. Sorry I'm a fan
20 matches
Mail list logo
