> If your application is 400 Mbps half-duplex, then this may
> actually be a fairly
> good comparison. Price-wise, used BI8k and
> Cat5500/SupIII/RSM are about right,
> maybe. I'm not sure what you were thinking when you sent an
> email about this
> test to cisco-nsp, but I'd like to help you get geared in the
> right direction.
I wanted to know opinions.. like yours.. Many thanks to -dre, 'cos he fairly wroted soundly backlog..
>
> It would be much easier for testing and making comparisons if
> a mission statement
> of sorts was put forth. I could put a GSR up against an
> glass of orange juice
> and the GSR would lose (assuming my goal is to quench my thirst).
yep.. Mine goal, is to see results from traffic, like ftp/http and performance of this 2 devices...
REMEMBER!! few years ago, when L3 switching was deployed at CAT 5K! lot of problems occured.. If you had an highier flow of data
etc.. MLS was shutted down... Other problems with MLS at real production network started with Cat's 6500... I know that here, at
this list are presented persons which could comprehensivly speak about such problems.. IS it absolutely clear that Cisco or Nortel
or Foundry will never cryout at full mouth what kind of hardware-software probs they have... Since last 2 y.. I feel like Cisco IOS
and their problems are not anymore managable.. But truly.. since that time they added so much logic and features like any other
vendor doesn't..
I did worked with Nortel... no thanks ;-) Still top performer at the market is Cisco.. they know why... hence I wanted to try
big-rusty-iron... had also problems with hardware.. who doesn;t have...
Anyway .. I need top performer for server farm, which can handle multicast, L3/4 switching/load balancing/rate
limiting/prioritization/ACL at the hardware... soooo....wasn't so bad start?
> Knowing "what problem you are trying to solve" is probably a
> good idea before you
> start purchasing network equipment or even before evaluating
> it in a test environment.
Sure! I'm in..
> My advice to you: don't be so amateurish about testing
> hardware. It seems as if your
> testing isn't really that great. Using SnifferPro 4.5 isn't
> considered best-of-breed (or
Sniffer 4.5 is available and under certain conditions, it could fullfill standart flow at the constant packet size at full wire
rate.. other test beds are expensive..If I can AFFORD TEST BED I CAN BUY ANY SWITCH AROUND and forgot any of this testing ........
> even close) as far as packet generation goes. If you really
> want to get some solid results
> like you want, you are going to have to look at more than
> just ftp (unless that's the only
ftp test is VERY good considering large packet sizes (full MTU) and constant flow... it is VERY easy and close to the reality..'cos
it is reality... I need REALITY...not TTCP... which is nice for line flooding....
My reality is, that when I sit behind my notebook and plug it to the 100BaseT Ethernet and would like to download some data from the
net, I want them as fast as possible.. why not at wire speed? and why not to disccuss over VOIP with my colleagues..? .hmmmmm
okay.... I'm quiet...
> use of these switches, which I doubt). You are going to have
> to test with different packet
> sizes and for certain periods of time, etc. Write out a
> methodology/approach for doing this
> correctly, it shouldn't take much of your time. If you need
sure.... but missing equipment for that....not going to programm it by myself.. ;-)
> some help, try searching the
> Internet and looking for network equipment testing processes.
> Some good places to start
> might be:
> http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/bmwg-charter.html,
> http://www.lightreading.com/testing/,
> but there are many others. You might *want* to get Foundry
> or Cisco involved; they both have
> excellent labs and testing engineers that can help you with
yes... would you like to pay that ;-) Yes... I know.. don't bite me...
> the process. If you feel you'd
> like something more neutral in the testing, you don't trust
> yourself, and you can afford it,
that is only what I believe, My self :-P
> hire someone outside your company to do this for you. Since
> it seems like you are set on
> doing this yourself, try and do the best you can with the
> resources you have available.
I'm trying... Thankx for your imput
>
> -dre
>
Alex
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:13:01 EDT