[c-nsp] BGP on Catalyst 5505???

[Mark]

What is the difference between RSFC and RMS?

Mark

On Sep 1, 2004, at 6:16 PM, Konstantin Barinov wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> Here's one 5505 + RSFC (pretty similar to RSM) that now routes ~700M,
> CPU load on RSFC is about 20%. There are about 100 vlan interfaces
> and only handful of them have access-lists enabled. There's also eigrp
> running. Some time ago it did bgp also (of course, not full table). :)
>
> Traffic from/to vlan interface with access-list enabled (and another 
> fancy
> features) will be switched by CPU instead of MLS. This degrades 
> performance
> very much. I guess 5505 + RSFC without access-lists will be able to 
> route
> at "wire speed" of it's limited buses.
>
> In general, 5505 is very old but very stable box. I like it.
>
>
> br
> --
> Konstantin Barinov
> INFONET AS, Tallinn, Estonia
>
>
> Wednesday, September 1, 2004, 6:28:10 PM, you wrote:
>
> M> Performance is one of my first concern, which type of performance 
> can i
> M> expect from RSM???
>
> M>   Mark
>
> M> On Sep 1, 2004, at 12:56 AM, Spencer Garrett wrote:
>
>>> On conce, 31 Aug 2004, Mark wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm planning to use an old Catalyst 5505 to run BGP for peeing.
>>>> I have SUPII and RSM.  Is it powerful enough or I'm trying something
>>>> crazy?
>>>>
>>>> What do you think about that?
>>>
>>> The main limitation of the RSM is that it will only hold 128 MB of 
>>> RAM.
>>> That won't be a problem for a peering router, so I think you'll 
>>> likely
>>> be happy if the RSM is fast enough for your traffic levels.
>>>
>>> Spencer
>>>
>
> M> _______________________________________________
> M> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> M> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> M> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>