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. </tangent> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <[email protected]> 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<[email protected]> >> 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: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
