[nsp] Re: Catalyst 6500 Hybrid

[James Edwards]

On Sat, 2004-05-01 at 13:26, Bryan wrote:
> Considering the 60meg/75-80PPS worth of 64byte UDP unicast packets and the
> fact that an upgrade from non-VXR npe-225 to vxr npe-400 only gained about
> 8% better cpu usage the platform just doesn't seem to be able to handle it
> with any processor.

I run a state wide network, consisting of 8 7206-xvr's, NPE-400's internet
facing and NPE-300's customer facing. Quite a fight for me to get 400/300's
vs 225's, not to mention the large capital outlay. I felt this would scale better,
and enable us to come closer to using the six slots on each router. The next step
would be converting the 7206's to G1, as needed.

This UDP issue is not acceptable, can you say DDoS ? Once bit, twice shy;
so I don't see the solution as a lateral move to a switch that routes, for us.
I see it as a move to the other router vendor.

Cisco, are you listening ?


-- 
James H. Edwards
Routing and Security Administrator
At the Santa Fe Office: Internet at Cyber Mesa  
jamesh at cybermesa.com
noc at cybermesa.com





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20040501/0e37b748/attachment.bin