2 edits | reply to BlueC
Re: Metro Ethernet: 2821 vs. 2921 router 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% |
|
| 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. |
|
| reply to cooldude9919
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. |
|
| 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. |
|
| 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  |
|
| 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. |
|
1 edit | I can't disclose that information. Ha ha ha. |
|
|
|
nosx
join:2004-12-27
00000
kudos:5
1 edit | 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. |
|
3 edits | 
ISR G2 Family Throughput |
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. |
|
nosx
join:2004-12-27
00000
kudos:5
1 edit | 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. |
|
1 edit | |
|
 sporkmedrop the crantini and move it, sisterPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to kamikatze
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 |
|
| 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. |
|
 jsb
join:2009-12-25
Canada | 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... |
|
nosx
join:2004-12-27
00000
kudos:5 | 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... |
|
