[nsp] Alternative to 2611XM?...

[Paul Stewart]

An 806 will get killed by that level of bandwidth.... How about a 1700
series instead?  Personally I'd stick with a 2600 series because of cpu
etc..  Don't think IPX is supported on the 800 series but pretty sure on the
1700 series (check with Cisco etc.).

Purely on throughput why not go to 1700 series with a pair of 10/100 ports?
You may find (depending on your supplier) though that by the time you load
up a 1700 you will be paying pretty close to a 2611XM anyways...

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Vincent De Keyzer
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 9:41 AM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [nsp] Alternative to 2611XM?...


Hello,
 
I have the following requirements:

*	a router with two 10baseT ports 

*	that supports OSPF and possibly IPX 

*	that can sustain an effective throughput of 8 Mbps

The solution I see is 2611XM, but that sounds overkill?.... Would 806 do the
job?
 
It has to be a new box (so plain 2611 is not a valid answer).
 
Thanks in advance
 
Vincent
 
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/