Sam,
Thats quite impressive, to be able to support that many queues and filter
rules. So apparently, those key services must be multi processor.
That is good to learn.
Eric,
Regarding single core apps. It may not matter all that much if an app is single
core, if it can use a unique core.
My concern is if key single core apps default to sharing the same core.
Faisal,
A single 1.2G processor per port is probably fine for large packets and Full
throughput. Im concerned on whether a single 1.2G core would be enough for full
throughput with average small packet sizes or DDOS situations. With X86
processors, in the past we've shown it was not. But then again, the CCRs arent
X86, and our past 4core X86 test machines, didnt have 36 procs to handle the
load of other processes.
Paul,
Since we are on a budget, and need something to put in place quickly w/ SPFs,
sounds like the 36core CCRs will solve our immediate need for Core BGP Router.
It clearly will do way much better than the 1100 dual core that we temporarilly
put in place, until we had time to order in a CCR.
Whether the CCR will handle our growth plans for head end, thats yet to be seen.
In our application we wont have nearly the number of rules per router as Sam's
example, as we do filtering and bandwidth management at each tower, to spread
out the load.
Last Question:
Long term, what Im most concerned about is how much throughput can be passed
per gig port. Meaning how close to theoretical wirespeed. Because
when calculating a providers cost per MB, its a big difference whether a router
port can push the full GB versus say 50%.
It can double a provider's cost per MB, requiring duplicating ones fiber
infrastructure prematurely.
Has anyone tested how small the average packet size can be and still achieve
theoretical wirespeed, in a simplified configuration over a single port?
1Gbps FDX, can 90% of that be acheived with 384k avg packet size?
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
----- Original Message -----
From: Sam Tetherow
To: WISPA General List
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 5:28 PM
Subject: [Spam] Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik on Multi-core
Replaced an aging powerrouter 732 with a CCR-1036. Set up as a transparent
bridge for traffic shaping. Passing 478M peak with 8200 interface bridge
filter rules and 8000 queue tree entries, cpu utilization peaks at about 50 and
all 36 CPUs are in use according to /system resource cpu print
The 732 started giving us CPU limitations at about 240Mbps. The whole thing
could be reworked so we didn't have so many filter rules or queue tree entries,
but the original installation replaced a MAC based bandwidth limiter and they
wanted to keep that setup.
Other than some lockup issues we had on ROS versions before 6.7 we have been
pretty happy with the box and for under $1k it is hard to beat.
On 01/24/2014 03:53 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
Hi everyone. Been awhile since Ive been here, so not sure if this is a
redundant topic or not.
Anyone got experience with Mikrotik on their newer Multi-Core platform,
using as a Core Router for interconnecting multiple Gig backbone connections
(w/ BGP, OSPF, Queues, Firewalls, VLAN tagging)?
To be more specific.... Comparing Mikrotik's 36 core 1.2Ghz models to say
a third party Quad core 3Ghz model.
What do we need 36 cores for, when we got 11 eth ports? Are they even used
by software? Is later Mikrotik Firmware allowing....
- multiple processors to handle a singe NIC port?
- which Mikrotik software features are able to effectively spread accross
to a unique processor or use multiple processors?
Is 1.2Ghz enough?
Do the embedded NICs in the 36core units pass full Gig capacity? (In past,
we learned depending on which NIC and driver brand, a NIC could pass as low as
only 30% of full capacity w/ large packets, where as a later generation PCIE w/
ATIO Intel could pass upward of 90% of full capacity w/ small packets.)
Im asking because back in the day, there were many Linux services relating
to routing that were written to be only single processor support.
Because of this, it was important to have the highest speed Ghz processor
possible, since some critical services (the bottleneck) would share only 1
primary processor, regardless of how many processors were in the router.
In past experience specific to Mikrotiktik, I often ran into issues with
added features (firewall rules, Queues, etc) drastically draining the
processing power of a MT router slowing throughput way below the theoretical
published port throughput.
For example, can Queues or Firewalls spread multiple processors?
Can these 36core units handle bandwdith management (Limiting or Queues) for
high speed subscribers, such as 100mb and 200 mbps customers?
In the GUI of v6.7, I dont see anything higher than 2mb or 10mb depending
on location of parameter.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
301-515-7774
IntAirNet - Fixed Wireless Broadband
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
