North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Cisco Router best for full BGP on a sub 5K bidget 7500 7200 or other vendor ?
Hmm; why do you want to keep BGP on a switch instead of installing separate router? Do you have a very wide uplink (uplinks)? // I do not object an idea. > > Yes. I've been looking at it and a 7505 with a 3550 behind it seems the > way to go for our type of operation. > > As a cost cutting alternative - has anyone played with the 2900 XL > series using sub interfaces to turn them into virtual router ports ? or > vlan groups ? > Is it better to just buy a 3550 ? > > Alexander Hagen > Etheric Networks Incorporated, A California Corporation > 527 Sixth Street No 371261 > Montara CA 94037 > Main Line: (650)-728-3375 > Direct Line: (650) 728-3086 > Cell: (650) 740-0650 (Does not work at our office in Montara) > Home: (Emgcy or weekends) 650-728-5820 > fax: (650) 240-1750 > http://www.etheric.net > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] > Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2004 5:09 AM > To: Alexander Hagen > Cc: 'Robert E. Seastrom'; 'Tom (UnitedLayer)'; email@example.com > Subject: RE: Cisco Router best for full BGP on a sub 5K bidget 7500 7200 > or other vendor ? > > On Sun, 25 Apr 2004, Alexander Hagen wrote: > > > 1) Catalyst 6006 w/ CATALYST 6000 SUPERVISOR ENGINE 1-A, 2GE, PLUS > MSFC > > & PFC > > Yuck. Unless you have very few flows you do not want to use MSFC1/PFC1. > > This platform would be good for a file server with few but highspeed > flows. > > > This system costs somewhere around 1300.00 more than a: > > Cisco 7505 w RSP4 256 Plus (2) VIP 2-50/128 and 3 PA-FE-TX > > > > Obviously the Catalyst is a better unit. But will it be as "burned in" > > and robust as the venerable 7505 ? > > The 7505 will probably handle lots of flows massively better than the > SUP1A. > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: firstname.lastname@example.org >