> >I'm sure you're not, but that's not what we've seen with a normal mix
> >of production traffic, is all, across many different IOS versions, with
> >cef, optimum, flow, and distributed or not.
>
> How do you know that the limits you were hitting were a result of packet
> switching limits or bandwidth limits on the VIP2-40 versus something else,
> either internal to the router (other processes eating up CPU) or something
> external to the router (net congestion)?
Nothing else was particularly loaded (cpu/bus/...), lots of configs were
tried, lots of different hardware, and we've never been able to achieve
anything like 400mb out of a VIP 2/40.
> >Are those reality-numbers or theory-numbers?
>
> As I said, they are raw performance numbers. Depending on your
> configuration, topology, network conditions, etc., YMMV.
>
> Better stated: You may see worse performance than this, but you won't see
> better performance than this.
Well, that's dancing around my question a bit.
The question was: are those raw-performance numbers based on observation
on a real router, or just theoretically computed?
I've had one private response indicating that 400mb was doable based
on observation, but you're not being very clear here about whether you've
observed such a thing.
> -rb
Avi
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:05 EDT