[c-nsp] new Cisco routers 1800/2800/3800

[Łukasz Bromirski]

Church, Chuck wrote:

 > Anyway, I think we've found Cisco's rating of pps and throughput to be
 > based on 64 byte packets and no interface config other than IP
 > addresses.

Yes, but some info is based on packets with 256-bytes or 512-bytes.
I don't have any URLs at hand, but some presentations and whitepapers
mention that.

> Cisco lists the 3745 at 225,000 pps and 115,200 kbps.

115,200kbps....of what? I don't see any figure close to this, but
only max console/AUX port speed...

 > I don't believe anyone here has seen this router even get close to
 > half that number of pps.

Then believe. I've got 3745 under tests with and without BGP, it
was doing close to 200kpps with Fastethernet<>Fastethernet routing
(no services/filtering/NAT). I.e. it was routing full 100Mbit/s of
64-bytes with CPU reaching 85-90%. It could do more, if the
packets weren't so small, i.e. it would fill the pipe much faster.

 > This new 3845 did about 95,000 pps at full size and with CBAC and
> NAT. 

...and it's certainly not the best pps figure You will find in
marketing materials. Good looking figures are high ones, and usually
pps values are given for 64-bytes packets, as they will be higher.
If 3845 can route 95kpps for 1500-bytes packets, it will route
more for 64-bytes - that's just math. Of course, the more the
packets in any slice of time, CPU/interface ASICs will do more
work, but this figure is very low.

-- 
this space was intentionally left blank    |              Łukasz Bromirski
you can insert your favourite quote here   |          lukasz:bromirski,net