site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Share Topic
Posting?
Post a:
Post a:
Links: ·Submit a new forum topic ·Forum FAQ ·Submit a FAQ ·Docs Guidelines and Advisories ·EOS/EOL thread
AuthorAll Replies

badsykes1

join:2004-12-08

reply to cooldude9919

Re: 1921 vs 891 Throughput Testing

I don't know what ZBFW is ,from the name feels like a firewall , but it seems to me that the 891 is optimized for this

891 ZBFW ONLY NO NAT
yourname#sh proc cpu
CPU utilization for five seconds: 26%/25%

1921 ZBFW ONLY NO NAT
CPU utilization for five seconds: 93%/92%

Also please explain to me this values:
1921 NAT ONLY
CPU utilization for five seconds: 92%/91%;
15.0-1 m8

[1896] 0.0-60.0 sec 866 MBytes 121 Mbits/sec
[1912] 0.0-60.0 sec 832 MBytes 116 Mbits/sec
[1880] 0.0-60.0 sec 824 MBytes 115 Mbits/sec
[SUM] 0.0-60.0 sec 2.46 GBytes 352 Mbits/sec

CISCO 891 NAT ONLY
flash:c890-universalk9-mz.150-1.M6.bin
CPU utilization for five seconds: 21%/21%
[1880] 0.0-60.0 sec 219 MBytes 30.6 Mbits/sec
[1912] 0.0-60.0 sec 225 MBytes 31.5 Mbits/sec
[1896] 0.0-60.0 sec 225 MBytes 31.5 Mbits/sec
[SUM] 0.0-60.0 sec 670 MBytes 93.6 Mbits/sec

They feel weird...
Why 219 MBytes (the size of the file delivered only 30mbit and the 670MB file delivered 93.6Mbits (the full 100mbit port capacity)?

Also same problem for 1921 ...2.46GB file 352mbit ? --- gbit ? and with the an 866MB file got only 121Mbit ....

sorry if those are dumb question... i am not too much in Enterprise sector of equipment..

cooldude9919

join:2000-05-29
Cape Girardeau, MO
kudos:5

ZBFW is zone based firewall, so yes its a firewall. 891 isnt necessarily optimized moreso than the 1921, but i am suprised how well it does. If the 891 had 2x1gb it could pretty much keep up with the 1921 with zbfw throughput

I used IPERF for the throughput testing. I did 3 streams for 60 seconds, so it adds up how much data each stream had in the 60 seconds for the total data transfered and total throughput which is the last line of each section starting with [SUM].

1921 3 streams, each stream did what was listed, comes up to 2.46Gbyte which comes out to 352mbit over 60 seconds.

891 3 streams, each stream did what aws listed, comes up to 670Mbytes which comes out to 93mbit over 60 seconds, obviously the 100mbit port is the limit here not cpu.

hope this helps clear things up


Monday, 20-May 13:59:40 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 13.5 years online © 1999-2013 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics