Personal Opinion.... I believe the CCR is a greatly suited as a Tower Router or (Customer network facing Router, bridge, traffic shaping, filter rules etc)
However I believe at the present x86 (i3/i5/i7) based MT are more suited for Internet Facing Edge routers (doing Multiple Full BGP Tables etc, very little to no filter rules...) Depending on Traffic load and (smaller) network design , it is quiet possible to use either one as a 'all in one' but in the long run it would be better to break out into two separate boxes. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom DeReggi" <wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 8:20:19 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Spam] Re: Mikrotik on Multi-core > 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 Wireless@wispa.org > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wireless mailing list > > > Wireless@wispa.org > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
