18 messages in net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp[c-nsp] Cisco 7304 as a Border router
FromSent OnAttachments
Robert BlayzorJan 14, 2005 10:30 am 
McCallum, RobertJan 14, 2005 10:39 am 
Clinton WorkJan 14, 2005 1:03 pm 
Rodney DunnJan 14, 2005 1:44 pm 
Mark PriorJan 15, 2005 12:24 am 
Majid FaridJan 15, 2005 4:59 am 
Mikael AbrahamssonJan 15, 2005 5:27 am 
sth...@nethelp.noJan 15, 2005 9:03 am 
Robert BlayzorJan 15, 2005 10:15 am 
Mark PriorJan 15, 2005 11:25 pm 
sth...@nethelp.noJan 16, 2005 12:17 am 
Majid FaridJan 16, 2005 2:23 am 
Mikael AbrahamssonJan 16, 2005 2:31 am 
McCallum, RobertJan 16, 2005 5:01 pm 
Majid FaridJan 17, 2005 12:12 pm 
Kevin GrahamJan 17, 2005 9:36 pm 
McCallum, RobertJan 18, 2005 4:59 am 
Simon LeinenJan 21, 2005 3:20 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:[c-nsp] Cisco 7304 as a Border routerActions...
From:Majid Farid (Maji@TelecomOttawa.com)
Date:Jan 15, 2005 4:59:38 am
List:net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp

I am running 4 7304's with NSE-100. They are good routers the only issue we have encountered so far is IOS train is still pretty buggy. We have done upgrades twice last year due to different bug and another one is due now. The bandwidth test we did using IXIA we did were not bad. If I remember correctly we stared to see 4% packet lost at around 800mbps witn 64 bytes packet size. Also I have no issues running BGP full routes on them.

-- Majid Farid Network Specialist Telecom Ottawa

-----Original Message----- From: cisc@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisc@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of McCallum, Robert Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 10:39 AM To: 'Robert Blayzor'; cisc@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Cisco 7304 as a Border router

Yep not a problem running with the 7304's mate. However, (yes there is a however). DO NOT TOUCH THE NPE-G100 with a BARGE POLE. It's a 7200 in disguise. Opt for the NSE-100. Everything you are looking to do shall be done in PXF when using the NSE-100. The NSE-100 can shift ~4or5 gigs in total across its backplane whereas the NPE-G100 can shift ~(too embarressed to say in a public forum + Cisco would send round the heavies).

Robert McCallum CCIE #8757 R&S

-----Original Message----- From: Robert Blayzor [mailto:rbla@inoc.net] Sent: 14 January 2005 15:30 To: cisc@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco 7304 as a Border router

We are exploring purchasing a couple of new border routers for our network. We've explored the 7600's but they seem to be way overkill for what we want to do.

Day one we will probably use them to aggregate a few DS3/OC3 connections to upstreams with full BGP tables, etc. We also want to use them for some aggregated Ethernet connections over Gig-E...

We've looked at the pluses and minuses of the NSE100 vs the G100. It seems the G100's processing power and DRAM capacity is a better fit for us, especially for the routing tables.

I'm looking for anyones comments or experiences with using 7300's in a border router deployment and if it's meeting your needs. I'm curious as to what type and how much traffic you are pushing through it.

-- Robert Blayzor, BOFH INOC, LLC rblayzor\@(inoc.net|gmail.com) PGP: http://www.inoc.net/~dev/ Key fingerprint = 1E02 DABE F989 BC03 3DF5 0E93 8D02 9D0B CB1A A7B0

Design: The activity of preparing for a design review.

_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisc@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisc@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/