[c-nsp] PPPoe Access Concetrators

[Arie Vayner]

You have to take into account that the number of sessions you can
really handle depends on the pps rate per session... If it's dial up
low-speed then marketing numbers are correct, but as the pps rate goes
up (broadband service) the concurrent sessions number goes down.
I have seen 7301's running 4000+ sessions for broadband services in production.

Arie

On 8/11/05, Paul Stewart <pstewart at nexicomgroup.net> wrote:
> We're moving from Redback to the 7200's currently so my opinion is
> biased to some degree.  We have had numerous issues with our Redbacks
> that I don't see in the Cisco world....  And not trying to start a war
> on the Redbacks (really)... But 10k sessions?  Is this a marketing
> number or real world?
> 
> Our plans are to get 5k sessions on a 7206VXR even though Cisco claims
> 16,000.  We'll push it to 8k sessions but I think we'll hit limits at
> that number... My opinion anyways....
> 
> Thanks :)
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Crocker [mailto:matthew at crocker.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 9:32 AM
> To: Tim Devries
> Cc: Paul Stewart; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PPPoe Access Concetrators
> 
> 
> I have had very good luck with our Redback SMS 1800.  With a CE3/FE3
> combo it can support upto 10k PPPoE/L2TP terminations.
> 
> -Matt
> 
> On Aug 11, 2005, at 9:06 AM, Tim Devries wrote:
> 
> > It's one that had occurred to us, but I'd like to know what else is
> > out there, what others are using, and if they have had good
> > experiences with those products.  And of course cost is always a
> > consideration ;)
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paul Stewart [mailto:pstewart at nexicomgroup.net]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 10:07 AM
> > To: Tim Devries; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: RE: [c-nsp] PPPoe Access Concetrators
> >
> > Why leave the 7200 platform?  By your post it sounds like your're
> > doing a lot more on your existing 7200's than PPPOE/L2TP stuff?  Maybe
> 
> > add more 7200's, upgrade the processors, or look at 7301's?
> >
> > Just some thoughts..:)
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Tim Devries
> > Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 8:53 AM
> > To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: [c-nsp] PPPoe Access Concetrators
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Can anyone on the list speak to their experience with reliable PPPoE
> > access concentrators capable of doing L2TP tunneling?  We'd like to
> > take the load off of our 7200's and aggregate sessions from our DSL
> > and wireless customers on a reliable third party platform, preferably
> > one capable of doing at least several thousand sessions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Tim
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> >
> 
> --
> Matthew S. Crocker
> Vice President
> Crocker Communications, Inc.
> Internet Division
> PO BOX 710
> Greenfield, MA 01302-0710
> http://www.crocker.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>