Since I've got some private responses, I have to clarify this.
- I'm doing this comparation without any "official" support of cisco or foundry.
- I'm not member any of IT magazine or whatever...
- I did this comparation as an "amateur" without any official test bed equipment or support...
- I wanted to share my feeling and findings with all brains connected to the cisco-nsp, 'cos here are many of us who working with
large technologies ...
- I didn't want to compare two MARKETING products e.g. bigiron vs Cat 5500.. that's not possible..
- I wanted to compare L3 switching and QoS as an amateur (in conditions, where both devices should gave top perf.) ... Mine farm
brain says, that if both sides claim to have some performance.. I should get them.. I've been told...that ...believe what they
want to tell ya ;-)
If I did somethin' wrong, for instance I'm relally comparing something uncompareable... let me know... yell it out here... I'm
listening..
Since I had lot of hardware-software troubles with any networking devices, I know that nothin' is perfect... but sometimes ... it's
hard to survive... and we know that 99.9 % network up is Sci-fi.. like networking performance at winnt 4.0 ;-) or 16bit PCMCIA
100BaseTX network cards.. whatever.. too ironical..
I have all perf. numbers from testing.. Setup is (was) very easy ...
any questions?
awaiting...
greetz
Alex
-----Original Message-----
From: KF [mailto:kf@reign.sk]
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 2:06 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [nsp] L3 switching BIGIRON 8000 vs CAT 5500 some testing
reports..
Heyla,
Would like to share some testing info's wich I observed...
Big Iron:
Version 07.2.09T53
Cat5500
S-C5500 Software, Version McpSW: 6.3(4) NmpSW: 6.3(4)
RSM
IOS (tm) C5RSM Software (C5RSM-IK8O3SV-M), Version 12.2(6a)
tested modules:
Cat RSM:
12 1 WS-X5302 Hw : 7.5
Fw : 20.22
Fw1: 3.1(1)
Sw : 12.2(6a)
Cat Supervisor III
1 0 WS-X5530 Hw : 3.4
Fw : 5.1(2)
Fw1: 4.4(1)
Sw : 6.3(4)
Cat 24 port switch
2 24 WS-X5224 Hw : 1.4
Fw : 3.1(1)
Sw : 6.3(4)
3 gig E SX
5 3 WS-X5403 022127016 Hw : 1.3
Fw : 4.5(2)
Sw : 6.3(4)
Cat 24 port switch
8 24 WS-X5224 Hw : 1.3
Fw : 3.1(1)
Sw : 6.3(4)
Big iron 8000:
supervisor with 8 gig E SX
S1: BxGMR4 M4 Management Module, SYSIF 2 M4, ACTIV
switching cards 24 port
S2: B24E Copper Switch Module OK
S3: B24E Copper Switch Module OK
Statement:
I agree, that this two devices are not comparable. I did comparation in "limits" where both should gave as good as they claim
performance.
Test bed is made of 3 Servers with 100Mbit FDX Intel chipset (erghmm compaq neteligent) .. each server have around 800 MHZ CPU and
High speed SCSI HDDS with STRIPE SET (no parity) and 512 MB ram...
Servers running Win2K (do not blame me on that..they performing very well also with Gigabit Eth adapters...have done it years
ago...)
Netbios and all shitty services disabled...
tested with packet generators and ftp (standard IIS 5.0 patched and standard ms client)
now... I don't want to publish here all data (want to hide ;-))) but my results are:
- testing L2 switching...
Cat 5000 very good
Big iron little more performance
- testing L3 swithing ....(mls)
cat 5000 very good
big iron once again better...and better than L2 switching at all why?!?
- testing L3 switching with extended IP access list IN/OUT
cat 5000 good but CPU RSM running 30 %
big iron CPU 5 % and THE SAME throughput... 11110.43Kbytes/sec hmmm (output from ftp client..)
Now I'm testing QoS... dunno if want to publish any nfo's...
now...
awaiting discussion..from both sides... c'mon... let's start hiding..or?
Alex
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:13:29 EDT