Topic 'Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router' in forum 'Cisco' - dslreports.com

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Thu, 04 Feb 2010 23:39:55 EDT

HELLFIRE posted : No actual hardware identifiers... well nuts to that Cisco!
Any chance of getting pics of the internals?

Regards

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:05:56 EDT

BlueC posted : We went through our ISP for everything. 2821 was priced at $3200, 2921 came in @ just under $3000. Newer router was cheaper, go figure... :)

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:51:26 EDT

sporkme posted : What was the street price?

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:34:21 EDT

BigBlockChev posted : We bought a pair of these and are very happy thus far.

#sh verCisco IOS Software, C2900 Software (C2900-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 15.0(1)M, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc2)Technical Support: http://www.cisco.com/techsupportCopyright (c) 1986-2009 by Cisco Systems, Inc.Compiled Wed 30-Sep-09 05:30 by prod_rel_team ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 15.0(1r)M1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) ...Cisco CISCO2921/K9 (revision 1.0) with 487424K/36864K bytes of memory.Processor board ID FTX13******3 Gigabit Ethernet interfaces1 Virtual Private Network (VPN) ModuleDRAM configuration is 64 bits wide with parity enabled.255K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory.254464K bytes of ATA System CompactFlash 0 (Read/Write) ----------------------------------------------------------------Technology    Technology-package          Technology-package              Current       Type          Next reboot  -----------------------------------------------------------------ipbase        ipbasek9      Permanent     ipbasek9security      securityk9    Permanent     securityk9uc            None          None          Nonedata          None          None          None ****** uptime is 4 weeks, 6 days, 21 hours, 16 minutesSystem returned to ROM by power-onSystem restarted at 18:14:46 CST Wed Dec 30 2009System image file is "flash0:c2900-universalk9-mz.SPA.150-1.M.bin" #sh crypto eliHardware Encryption : ACTIVE Number of hardware crypto engines = 1  CryptoEngine Onboard VPN details: state = Active Capability    : IPPCP, DES, 3DES, AES, IPv6, GDOI, FAILCLOSE, HA  IPSec-Session :    18 active,  3600 max, 0 failed#sh platform CIU Interrupt info:===================CIU Int  Handler    Count   Context     Level  Name0        0x21188738 319458500  0x0         IP2    Pow Interrupt18       0x211622A4 3013578  0x2         IP3    fpga interrupt30       0x211622EC 0       0xE         IP2    USB 0 Over Current i31       0x211622EC 0       0xF         IP2    USB 1 Over Current i34       0x2114996C 1       0x1         IP4    Aux Port interrupt35       0x2114996C 4       0x0         IP4    Console interrupt40       0x21164CFC 0       0x0         IP2    MSI 0 interrupt41       0x21164CFC 0       0x1         IP2    MSI 1 interrupt42       0x21164EF8 0       0x2         IP2    IO-Controller Networ43       0x21165110 1       0x3         IP2    IO-Controller Mgmt/E46       0x21162A38 2       0x0         IP2    NPEI RML interrupt52       0x21167FD8 36439   0x28CA3E4C  IP3    CIU Timer 0 ISR53       0x21167FD8 0       0x304ABFA4  IP2    CIU Timer 1 ISR54       0x21167FD8 4596    0x28CA3EC0  IP2    CIU Timer 2 ISR56       0x211B13F4 1       0x0         IP2    USB 0 interrupt IP2 Int En: 0x01604F00 C0000001IP3 Int En: 0x00100000 00040000IP4 Int En: 0x0000000C 00000000#sh diag Slot 0:C2921 Mother board 3GE, integrated VPN and 4W Port adapter, 3 portsPort adapter is analyzed Port adapter insertion time 4w6d agoEEPROM contents at hardware discovery:PCB Serial Number        : FOC13******Hardware Revision        : 1.0Part Number              : 73-11835-03Top Assy. Part Number    : 800-30794-01Board Revision           : A0Deviation Number         : 0Fab Version              : 03Product (FRU) Number     : CISCO2921/K9Version Identifier       : V01 CLEI Code                : COMGL00ARAProcessor type           : C2 Chassis Serial Number    : FTX13******Chassis MAC Address      : 0025.45******MAC Address block size   : 80Manufacturing Test Data  : 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 EEPROM format version 4EEPROM contents (hex):  0x00: ......  0xF0: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FFInternal power Supply informationTop Assy. Part Number    : 341-0226-01Deviation Number         : 0PCB Serial Number        : QCS13******RMA Test History         : 00RMA Number               : 0-0-0-0RMA History              : 00Version Identifier       : V01         Product (FRU) Number     : PWR-2921-51-ACCLEI Code                : 0000000000Board Revision           : B0EEPROM format version 4EEPROM contents (hex):  0x00: ......  0xF0: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Wed, 03 Feb 2010 10:53:33 EDT

BlueC posted : Indeed it is a great machine, an overkill perhaps, but it gets the job done and leaves plenty of room for bandwidth upgrades going forward.

Now our only bottleneck is every subscribers personal router. I think the 20-35 mbps symmetrical bandwidth is too much for some people's equipment. Never thought I'd see this as being a problem, it's a happy/sad feeling. :)

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:36:37 EDT

jsb posted : Great machine - maybe a bit overkill for your application but excellent bang for the buck :)

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:57:19 EDT

kamikatze posted :

said by tubbynet:

said by BlueC:

A bit late to the party, but we ended up going with a 2921. Seems to work out just fine. No complaints.

should crack it open and take pics of the hardware for kamikatze

:D

q.

Even a show version/platform/diag is great!
show crypto eli
would also be nice!

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:27:17 EDT

BlueC posted : I will say that the 2921 was roughly the same cost as the 2821 when we were ordering it. I think it's simply a no-brainer considering the 2921 can handle more bandwidth.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:31:59 EDT

tubbynet posted :

said by BlueC:

A bit late to the party, but we ended up going with a 2921. Seems to work out just fine. No complaints.

should crack it open and take pics of the hardware for kamikatze

:D

q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..."

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:27:45 EDT

BlueC posted : A bit late to the party, but we ended up going with a 2921. Seems to work out just fine. No complaints.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 31 Jan 2010 12:50:04 EDT

tubbynet posted :

said by Bink:

I hate to rain on the Cisco parade here, but for the price, the chart (»/speak/slidesh···cm91dGVy) kamikatze posted is pathetic—and reeks of Cisco overselling.

is the chart 100% accurate? depends on your definition of accurate. :D

i would assume that these routers/engines are being tested under "ideal" conditions - no firewall, no nat, large packet size, no qos. under those conditions, i'm sure you hit the throughput numbers before the pps numbers. however, if you're passing a lot of rtp for voip in the network, obviously, you're going to hit pps limits before throughput.

is the cost of a 2821 worth it? depends on what you're going to do with it and how much you value your time. with your open source solutions, you could saturate a 100meg metro-e link and provide qos and firewall and such. however, if you're looking for a solution to a "one-off" scenario, you could be searching/working for hours or even days. cisco has a support base and plenty of people who have "been there and done that". i also like the flexibility of the isr series for gateway routers because of their versatility - i can make it an edge firewall, provide qos, terminate remote access vpns, and have it function as a call manager and unity server - a branch in a box.

now, i'm not discrediting one solution over the other - they are both valid (however you must realise that i'm biased in one direction - an exercise i'll leave for the reader to determine which way). part of being a successful network engineer/architect is knowing how and where you should fight your battles and with what gear. i'm not against running juniper, force10, or other manufacturers of gear as long as you select the right box for the job.

q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..."

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 31 Jan 2010 12:04:42 EDT

Bink posted : I hate to rain on the Cisco parade here, but for the price, the chart (»/speak/slidesh···cm91dGVy) kamikatze posted is pathetic—and reeks of Cisco overselling. I like Cisco as much as the next guy, but you might want to SERIOUSLY consider looking at open source here. MOST MODERN PC-CLASS MACHINES with GigE NICs will OUTPERFORM almost EVERY ROUTER on that chart. Yes, these routers can do things open source can’t (and the same is true vice versa), but if all you need is some commodity firewalling and QoS, you’d be foolish not to evaluate open source as well. Hell, even the ASA devices run Linux at their core. At the very high end, NO PC can match ASIC driven hardware, but you are NOWHERE near there.

Sometimes going with Cisco is akin to murdering money.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 31 Jan 2010 08:59:25 EDT

nosx posted : Is there a big performance or feature comparison between 3750s and ME3400s? Im looking for MPLS PE (with bgp) capable multilayer switches for remote sites in a CSC environment...

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 31 Jan 2010 01:15:00 EDT

jsb posted : Have you tried the ME3400 series instead of the 3750 Metro's? We've been deploying those out in the field, they seem pretty good...

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 23:52:10 EDT

Da Geek Kid posted : all the x900 series are ASIC based, and they do not process switch... Process switch is referred to the CPU doing the switching...

And BTW the Cat3750ME does Far better MPLS/MPLS VPN than a router due to the fact the you can tag a VLAN straight into the MPLS... We use them in many of our sites we support... the only time we use 3800/3900s are when it's a DS3 or a serial line.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:59:24 EDT

sporkme posted : That chart in general looks like BS. They claim an NPE-300 can do 353,000 pps. Pure fantasy... I've seen one become unusable (ie: drop bgp and ospf, unusable console, barely pass traffic) at around 35,000 pps. No fancy stuff other than some basic anti-spoof ACLs.

What's it mean when the process-switched column is blank? The router *never* does any process-switching?

Since the numbers are fudged, can I at least believe the ratios from one product to another?
--
with every mistake we must surely be learning

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 12:12:45 EDT

nosx posted : MetroE might be code for internet connection with ethernet access handoff to client. You would need a MLS capable of NAT in that case, or a separate firewall.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:12:20 EDT

Da Geek Kid posted : For Metro Ethernet... I'd look at a Switch and NOT a router, something like the 3750 ME it's capable of pushing 8mpps as opposed to 900kpps...
IMHO

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:35:17 EDT

kamikatze posted : The infamous routerperformance.pdf has been updated and the numbers for ISR G2 are, well, as Apple would say, ..magical.

»www.cisco.com/web/partners/downl···ance.pdf

Unsupported WICs:
»www.bradreese.com/cisco-isr-g2-support.htm

Speedy Gonzales

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:59:58 EDT

nosx posted : I have had the same gripes about the 5580 ASA platform. Its got all those cores, and all that ram, but its still a 32bit image running on 64bit hardware.
The software is lagging behind the ability to truly use the hardware they are loading it on.
Also, the ASR numbers look fairly accurate. I am using them to provide L2 MPLS ethernet pseudowires between datacenters across sonet infrastructure. Those things can take anything we have thrown at them in any role.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:27:49 EDT

kamikatze posted : Apparently the official figures include CME/IPS/ZBFW/ACLs/NAT, "services you would run in a typical branch setup".
The CPU might be multicore, but the IOS is still an old monolithic approach and there's no SMP support yet (if ever). And no there's not going to be an IOS XE for the ISRs (i asked :) ).

Routerperformance.pdf has been also updated:
»www.cisco.com/web/partners/downl···ance.pdf
ASR1000's digits are jaw-dropping.

ISR G2 Family Throughput

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:25:19 EDT

nosx posted : So we got the official word from Cisco in their presentation yesterday.
The 3945 is designed to handle "150mbps" at most. This is a step up from the 3845s which were more 45mbps~ish.
The lower end routers are still lower end routers designed for their previous tasks. A 2911 is still designed to be just a NxT1 router but its designed to run more services than the 2811.
Cisco still hasnt provided me the PPS details i requested from them. To my knowledge none of their sales presentation is NDA. These details should all be trickling out very soon.
If you are seriously pushing 100mbps and up, i would still go with a 7200. They are probablly the most economical choice unless ur looking at ISRg2 specific features like the video-on-pvdms.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:30:57 EDT

kamikatze posted : I can't disclose that information. Ha ha ha.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:21:18 EDT

cooldude9919 posted :

said by kamikatze:

So being the troll that i am, i trolled a bit the ISR G2 webex.

I got nothing. I'm gonna crack open every single ISR G2 i get my hands on :)

haha good stuff.

For the price i dont see the x900 series competing with the 1811 on ethernet performance do you?

Now if you need good ethernet performance and some wic or NM slots then that may be a different story.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:18:18 EDT

kamikatze posted : So being the troll that i am, i trolled a bit the ISR G2 webex.

I got nothing. I'm gonna crack open every single ISR G2 i get my hands on :)

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:37:26 EDT

cooldude9919 posted :

said by BlueC :

Thanks guys. I think I will find out how soon we can get a 2921. Cisco essentially rates the capability about 5x compared to the 2821. I think we would be fine with up to 100mbps with the 2921. Probably have a bit of room above 100mbps for future upgrades.

Yea if you have the money i would go for the 2921. The 2900 series looks like what the 2800 series should have been in the first place.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:08:00 EDT

anon posted : Thanks guys. I think I will find out how soon we can get a 2921. Cisco essentially rates the capability about 5x compared to the 2821. I think we would be fine with up to 100mbps with the 2921. Probably have a bit of room above 100mbps for future upgrades.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:25:11 EDT

ladino posted : I would go for the 2921 since ISR G2 is the direction that Cisco is going to. Talk to your Cisco sales rep, get a Demo unit. This way you can play with the new ISR G2. You can then use this decision your future MetroE or other high speed links & thus future-prove yourself.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 15:19:28 EDT

cooldude9919 posted :

said by BlueC :

Thanks for the tip. However, I do wonder if the 3845 is kind of an overkill since we really only need an Ethernet data solution, no need for voice (other than VOIP which runs over data), T1/T3 connections, etc.

I just need a proper router than can handle Ethernet throughput and still manage QoS. Perhaps I am looking at the wrong line of products? Trying to keep costs somewhat reasonable but am willing to spend what is needed and not cut corners. I thought the 2921 with the extra memory and faster processor (multi-core verus single) would be enough for 40-80mbps, but then again, that seems to be a bit unclear since it's a new product.

If you arent doing any crypto traffic and minimial services (qos plus?) the 2821 would probably be OK. Honestly an 1811 might be OK too, because on pure ethernet performance it is close to a 2821, given the 2821 has gigabit ports.

We have 2 3845s, and once you start throwing crypto traffic at them the cpu starts getting hit pretty hard.

heres the current status of our 3845.

5 minute input rate 6295000 bits/sec, 1863 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 37542000 bits/sec, 4920 packets/sec

CPU utilization for five seconds: 41%/37%; one minute: 43%; five minutes: 37%

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:46:42 EDT

anon posted : Thanks for the tip. However, I do wonder if the 3845 is kind of an overkill since we really only need an Ethernet data solution, no need for voice (other than VOIP which runs over data), T1/T3 connections, etc.

I just need a proper router than can handle Ethernet throughput and still manage QoS. Perhaps I am looking at the wrong line of products? Trying to keep costs somewhat reasonable but am willing to spend what is needed and not cut corners. I thought the 2921 with the extra memory and faster processor (multi-core verus single) would be enough for 40-80mbps, but then again, that seems to be a bit unclear since it's a new product.

Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:51:11 EDT

kamikatze posted : Nobody really knows what the 1900/2900/3900 series is capable of in real life at this moment, i'd say don't miss this show:

»bit.ly/PzfkP

quote:
Is it worth upgrading your routers for a faster processor and a little more
memory? When it comes down to it, networking has gone through a major paradigm
shift. From HD video to virtualization to cloud extensibility to custom
crafted hacks, the days of bordered networks are long gone. To address this
need Cisco has had to break the mold and traditional roles to design a router
like none other.

Join TechWiseTV's Chief Geek Jimmy Ray Purser as he hosts Cisco ISR G2 Routing Specialist Matt Lambert for a deep technical dive into Cisco latest router the ISR G2. This interactive WebEx workshop will feature demos, and a look into the architecture without the marketing spin.

Jimmy Ray Purser from Cisco usually doesn't talk marketing smack. Should be interesting.

As for the 2821, yes it is underpowered for 80Mbps with services. I wouldn't touch anything smaller than a 3845 for QoS at those speeds.

Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router

Sun, 08 Nov 2009 11:28:22 EDT

anon posted : We're currently looking at a Cisco 2821 router for a 40mbps Ethernet handoff. Although I feel that the 2821 might be a bit underpowered for our needs (80-90 users, residential) and QoS is a top priority. Not to mention it seems a bit outdated.

I've read varying threads here stating the capabilities of the 2811/2821 and how CPU usage gets maxed out fairly easily. I want to ensure that we choose a router that can scale to at least 80mbps since we can scale our line to 100mbps quite easily.

Would the 2921 be appropriate for this setup? I would assume the multi-core processor is a necessary improvement with today's standards.

Our current setup is a Cisco 1700 series router with a 10mbps ethernet connection (which is being maxed out quite often). So anything will be an improvement. What I want to avoid is using a router that cannot handle the available throughput offered from our ISP and fails to properly manage traffic as needed. I also want a router that we can keep around for at least a few years and not seem outdated in terms of throughput capabilities.

Thoughts?