I agree with Clinton. You need to make sure
all the features you need are accelerated
in the PXF path or else you probably shouldn't
get it. The NSE-100
has a dual PXF complex so it has a lot more
room for features so most of the QOS, ACL,
etc..packet forwarding features are in there
Sorta like the 10k(ESR).
The NSE-1 only had a single PXF complex so
there was limited space for features.
Rodney
On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 11:04:12AM -0700, Clinton Work wrote:
Careful, PXF based routers are great until you run into a feature that
is not supported in hardware. I ran into a lot of feature limits of
the 7200 NSE-1 processor. There is always a trade off between features
and performance.
McCallum, Robert wrote:
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).
18 messages in net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp[c-nsp] Cisco 7304 as a Border router
